Sex Before Marriage is NOT a sin in the bible!!

Debating issues regarding sexuality

Moderator: Moderators

revjoel2013
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 6:29 pm

Sex Before Marriage is NOT a sin in the bible!!

Post #1

Post by revjoel2013 »

I study the bible and found that premarital sex is not a sin in the bible. This sin is created by Church doctrine. The early church twisted the word fornication to mean sex before marriage. The word fornication actually means having sex with a pagan temple prostitute. The early church fathers redefine the word fornication to mean all sex outside of marriage. This is how the doctrine that premarital sex is a sin started.

Why Should Christians Engage in Premarital Sex / Sex Before Marriage!!!

http://youtu.be/4lSv9kPIx0Q

What does fornication mean in the Bible; Latin Greek and Hebrew or

http://youtu.be/UVAI2TTOcgM[/img]

User avatar
Aetixintro
Site Supporter
Posts: 865
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 3:18 am
Location: Metropolitan-Oslo, Norway, Europe
Has thanked: 285 times
Been thanked: 16 times
Contact:

Re: Sex Before Marriage is NOT a sin in the bible!!

Post #31

Post by Aetixintro »

[Replying to post 1 by revjoel2013]

Note that the Mosaic Laws are obsolete so that modern lifestyle can be accepted given a more fair interpretation.

Maybe, therefore, even threesome is accepted as well.

However, I have the view that marriage serves both religious life very well and the children in it so perhaps we should stick with it for these 2 good reasons?

True love may last into Heaven, you know. :D
I'm cool! :) - Stronger Religion every day! Also by "mathematical Religion", the eternal forms, God closing the door on corrupt humanity, possibly!

User avatar
Falling Light 101
Apprentice
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:16 pm

Post #32

Post by Falling Light 101 »

[font=Arial]..Hello friends.

I have noticed that the anti Polygamous majority - are unknowingly literally siding and taking up a defensive stance by only looking only into the line / seed of Cain, as they deny the basic facts about the seed of Seth.

The fact is - that there were absolutely no women available for Seth to Mary even a single wife for nearly the first 100 years of His life and Seth did not have any availability to have a wife or children until He was over 100 years old.

The defense and narrow viewpoint of blaming and pinning polygamy marriage on the side of Cain’s seed who were murderers and who slaughtered and killed other - ( is what Anti Polygamy is really all about. )

As It denies the facts on the Bible and literally defends the Anti - Polygamy faith by focusing in upon Cain and His perverted, wicked and defiled seed while refusing to see anything concerning the situation and facts concerning the line of Seth.

( If ) - - If Polygamy marriage was accepted and loved and followed by the Trinitarian Translators and the worshipers of The Trinity God ! -

The entire Trinitarian religious organization would have already created theological words and labels and names to define and label - the opponents whom opposed Polygamy marriage. - Today there would be footnotes and reference links in every Trinitarian Bible that show how that God did condone and promote polygamy.

But throughout the majority Christian world it has been the total opposite - the opponents - or those who have opposed polygamy have sought to label and defame and castigate in an evil despicable rebuking - those who prove and believe from the Bible - that polygamy is ok with God. So, today there are no labels, no code words, no characterizations and no classifications in the mainstream majority of the so-called Christian / Religious world to define the lies, error and contradiction and deceit and outright dishonesty and deception that is a part of the Anti - Polygamy faith.

So - I have a very limited choice of words to use, in defining what it is that You are doing and claiming - and what is being done, when one seeks to claim that God did not condone polygamy – to even demand that God is against polygamy marriage. What more can I say but to truthfully declare that this is untruth and an outright lie. You would never understand the explanation from Gods word because the Trinitarian Fathers ( the government church ) has already made the decision “ LAW “ for You. And have molded Your very language for You - in such a way that does not allow a realistic discussion to go very far into truth.. Your language in religious terms will not acknowledge the truth because Your spiritual fathers have already RE - created the god in another image.

But, I do not want to label or accuse anyone of lying or being deceitful.
I want to be kind and respectful and simply show and discuss the * FACTS...... I only wish to look at the facts “ ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS “ of the Bible and see the truth, instead of relying upon the perverted and altered Trinitarian Translations. And there seems to be an overall denial of the basic Biblical facts - A consensus of denial - among many people -
to completely avoid the basic facts of the Bible.

The fact is - God had originally planned and ordained an “ INCEST “ type marriage - from the very beginning of His creation. “ INCEST “ was Gods only marriage plan - and the only option for men and women - for many generations was “ INCEST “ - In fact - “ Incest “ was practiced by Cain and Seth and all of Noah’s sons as well practiced Incest. Abraham and Saran also married in an incestual marriage. ( as Abraham and Sarah were brother and sister. ) - - And The fact is - The incestual marriage plan ordained by God. ( Full Incest ) was practiced by the servants of God – the Israelites, for about 2,500 years from the very beginning of creation - up until the Laws Of Moses, where God changed the law. Adam and Eve were an even closer form of Incest that marrying brothers and sisters. Adam and Eve were literally from the very same genetic code- closer than brothers and sisters.

But – still - God, still did not completely prohibit incestual marriage - through The Law Of Moses – but God only restricted incest, by commanding that “ NOW “ only brothers and sisters from the same father or mother, are no longer be allowed to practice incest marriage. -But God condoned and instituted - incestual marriage between second cousins. But nowhere in the Bible does God come out and state that Incest is ok.

Never, does the Bible say that God commanded anyone to practice Incest Marriage. God never said that Incest was ok - Yet anti polygamy believers pretend that this should be a deciding factor concerning their defense against Polygamy. - But the same goes for incest ( God never directly says the words - I command - Cain, Seth, Noah’s seed and Abraham and Jacob to practice incest.- or INCEST is ok with me. - - Yet we see God laying down rules and guidelines for both Incest and for Polygamy Marriage and showing how Incest and Polygamy is to be followed.

We see Gods guidelines and rules and regulation concerning Polygamy Marriage here in - EX 21:10

EX 21:10 IF ( A SON or /MAN } take himself ANOTHER WIFE; her food, her raiment, and the duty of marriage, shall he not DIMINISH. ( of the other wife. )

And - DEU. 21:15 IF A MAN HAVE TWO WIVES,.: .. he may not give all inheritance to the son of the beloved wife and take away from the firstborn son of [THE UNFAVORED WIFE] which is indeed the firstborn.

And - Deu 17:16 ( A King ) shall not multiply horses to himself 17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, to cause His heart to turn away ( { From God } ) neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.

The point of Deu 17:16 - was saying that a King was not to multiply many, many wives and horses and gold and silver - to the point that His Heart was turned and distracted away from serving God. - - The King was allowed to have more than one single horse and more than one single piece of gold and more than a single piece of silver - just as much as He was allowed to have more than a single wife. - - But the King was not to allow the horses, silver and gold and wives to distract Him to the point that causes His heart to be distracted and turned from focusing upon and following God. The verse is very clear. This is not commanding a King to not have two horses or two pieces of gold or silver - any more than two or more wives. What is the context of the verse - Why focus in on a single phraze and claim something that is not in the verse and entirety of the scriptures. ? ?

Also - Jdg 8:30 And Gideon had threescore and ten sons of his body begotten: for he had many wives. God is working through and giving victory through a man who has many wives.

Here in 1Sa Chapter 1 - The very Father of The Prophet Samuel had two wives and one of the wives was barren - Yet God is working in the polygamous marriage situation to heal the womb of the wife who was barren - to conceive a prophet of God named Samuel. - - 1Sa 1:2 .

Also here in - 1Sa 30:8 And David enquired spiritual help from The LORD and enquired help from Abiathar the priest – to help Him in recovering and getting back - two of His wives who had been captured by The Amalekites.

Why did God not inform the Priest to let David know that He was not supposed to have more than one wife. ?

And here in 2Sa 12:7 And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; - -:8 I { God } gave myself Your { Nathan’s } master ( DAVID ) - the house, and thy { Nathan’s } master
{ DAVID } His wives into His bosom.

Here in 2Sa 12:7-8 - God is directly commanding the Prophet - Nathan to tell King David that ( HE PERSONALLY ) “ God “ had given David His plural wives and that if it had not been enough, God would have given Him more.

Even in Gen 16:9  - The angel of the LORD commanded Hagar to Return to back to Abraham and Sarah and to submit herself.

God did not have a problem with Abraham practicing polygamy - Hagar was cast out because she and Her son were anti polygamous and persecuting, torment and hateful and violent toward Sarah And Isaac.
 
We see that God did promote polygamy in the Old and New Testament - while the Trinitarian Translators completely pervert and change every single aspect possible concerning the subject. - I could prove that many, many verses are changed in the Old and New Testament concerning polygamy marriage.

Remember - At the beginning - The fact is - Cain was the only male alive on earth with the very early option to be married among his own sisters, as You study the Bible - the Grand Children of Cain were the only people existing and alive on the Earth - who even existed - and who were able and capable of practicing Polygamy Marriage. There were no other sons of Adam -alive “ to practice polygamy “ - and Seth had no children until He was about 100 years old years of age. And after three generation after Cain.

The line/ seed of Seth were forced and limited to finding wives of the Great Grand Daughters of the wicked, defiled, Evil and perverted murderer Cain and His future seed and Cain and His seed had already taken the wives from daughters of Adam and Eve and Cain So the opportunity to practice polygamy by the descendants of Seth was completely and totally impossible - as there not only was a separation in the generation gap but the Seed of Seth were limited to seeking the available Godly and Holy righteous women who were rejected and unwanted women from the seed of Cain. And if any of Adam and Eves daughters were unmarried - they would be very, very old and barren by the time that the three GENERATIONS OF CAIN HAD PASSED.

Most of them had to wait for several generations - for an entire generation or two - of daughters, younger nieces and nephews - { GRANDCHILDREN } to grow up and mature - and only the rejected unmarried cousins and nieces that were not taken and available - were an option for marriage.
WE know that obviously Adam and Eve did not have any other living ( SONS ) except for Cain and Seth - and obviously - Adam and Eve - they did have daughters. So the Sons of Seth were to wait for almost a hundred years before they could even find a single wife. And of all of the sons of the line of Seth down did not produce any more sons { than one single son each ) of all of them- “ ALL OF THEM “ down to Noah - and it was only Noah, who was able to produce more than one single son and probably have no more than a single wife - Noah had three sons and finding a single godly wife was only a miracle. We find also, that Cain already had three Grand Sons ( THREE GENERATIONS HAD PASSED - before Seth was even born, as the seed of CAIN had a plenty amount of born females to choose from.

All of the women that Adam and Eve produced – were shifted and taken over by the seed of Cain and His sons. AND had become old and barren - Because Seth was not born until after ( THREE GENERATIONS OF CAIN ) had passed.

So the evil and defiled,perverted wicked Sons of The line of Cain who did not call upon the name of The Lord and who did not serve God - were producing and multiplying their sons and daughters and held the claim to the marriage of the daughters of Adam and Eve and also MARRIAGE CLAIM to their own YOUNGER nieces - as they matured in passing time - of possibly - UP TO HUNDRED YEAR GAP TO BE MARRIED TO THE SEED OF CAIN. Why would the seed of Cain be handing their Grand Daughters over to the seed of Seth - who were much, much older than the daughters. THERE WAS A WHOLE GENERATIONAL GAP CREATED BY - CAIN MURDERING HIS BROTHER -

THIS IS THE DEFENSE OF THE ANTI POLYGAMOUS TRINITARIANS - WHO ARE LITERALLY SIDING AND PROMOTING THE SITUATION OF THE SEED OF CAIN - AS THEY TURN THE TRUTH AND PERVERT THE TRUTH - TO CASTIGATE AND DEFAME, DENIGRATE, VILIFY AND SEEK TO TURN THE SEED OF SETH, ABRAHAM AND JACOB - into perverted criminals who were disobeying God by having multiple wives. While ignoring the facts.

However, The Sons of Seth did serve God and did call on the name of the Lord in contrast to the seed of Cain who were resistant and opposing to the Seed of Seth. The idea and opportunity for The Seed Of Seth to marry multiple daughters in polygamy - born from the Seed of Cain would be next to impossible and limited with Seth and His Grandsons serving God. As they were living with hundreds years of a generational gap and had no available mature, fertile women to marry and have sons with.

The Daughters of Adam and Eve would have been near death, barren and nearly a thousand years old by the time Seth was born. All seed available were the seed of Cain - with a generation gap and an anti God seed that it was impossible or restricted to acquire more than a single faithful, Godly wife to practice godly Biblical polygamy. The single wives that Seth found and His Grandsons found were a miracle that they even found a single, in - defiled Godly clean and WILLING wife – willing to serve God. Cain’s seed were very wicked – and the seed of Seth were not multiplying and were just barely preserved and barely survived from each generation to the next - down to Noah - as God destroyed the mainline root of the seed of Cain in the flood.

There were no other sons of Adam and Eve alive at the time when polygamy was mentioned - how is this proof or vindicating anything. Seth had not even been born yet.

[/font]

User avatar
Falling Light 101
Apprentice
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:16 pm

Additional Facts do cause some corrections.

Post #33

Post by Falling Light 101 »

I love additional forgotten Facts that cause some minor corrections to occur. I found an adjustment to clarify the scriptures by looking closer upon the word of God.

The most important thing that I realize when looking at the Original Manuscripts - was that it is very Obvious that Adam And Eve did have daughters.

And the fact of the matter is very obvious and would have to be the case - that Adam had indeed in fact scripturally - and righty tried to marriy at least a handful of His Grand Daughters in His earlier years from marriages that were not recorded –. - Probably due to the fact that the younger Grand Daughters - women He had married had in fact simply up and left Him - abandoned the marriage covenant and moved on to other Younger males when they became of age.

These are very, very important things that I left out - in my previous post and I know that You are all very, very knowledgeable and informed. And this is very, very important I am very sorry for leaving out this important fact - I simply forgot.

The generation gap that existed between Adam’s daughters and Seth’s Grand Sons was much bigger / larger / wider in age gap - years than I had previously detailed and it was from both ends of the male and female sexes...
I should have looked at my detailed notes instead of posting mostly from memory. I noticed when I went back and looked at my notes that it was also the MALE SEED of Seth that were also additionally much, much older in age as well – compared to the Daughters that Adam had much later on in His life.

Adam again tried to marry even more of His Grand Daughters later in life as Gen 5:4 clearly tells us. ( whenever - He was 800 years old. ( obviously this polygamy plan did not work for Him, as the Grand Daughters did not honor the marriage covenant and therefore they and their children are not named or listed ) - which was always the case with Adam and the future oncoming descending - sons of Seth were - to be generationally born.
As these future additional daughters of Adam mentioned here in Gen 5:4 - were not born until after - 800 Years after Seth had been born.
A huge detail that I did not entail and most of You probably already noticed these facts. - But - Because - Adam was only 130 years old when Seth was born, the Manuscripts explain that the generational gap with Seth - was that - all of the Grandsons of Seth would have very limited choice of women to marry because any additional DAUGHTERS of ADAM to marry - simply did not exist yet, as Seth’s following Grandsons in the lineage would have to wait for 800 years after the birth of Seth to even see any additional daughters whatsoever to be again - even born from Adam – because Adam did not produce any additional daughters until 800 Years after Seth had been born.

AND - Seth Himself, - He - did not produce any mentioned daughters who became permanent real wives in marriage to His sons - until 807 years after His own first son Enos was born. - However, because of the generational age gap difference, each and every single son - of the line of Seth would have to - and did wait - for an available wife to mature Some are unmentioned daughters of Cain whose mothers probably ran off to join the seed of Cain and Cain’s society - which is why they are never mentioned and they probably took their daughters with them. Which explains the 500 to 800 years of generational gaps between children being produced from the seed of Seth. The waiting time - seemed to decrease and then increase { Fluctuate / shift } back and forth a bit in the number of years as the years went on – just for the first wife that each progressing son marries, As Seth himself being much younger than Cain - did not have a son until a woman was available from Cain’s Grand Daughters or a younger Grand Daughter of Adam - at maturity - until He was 105 years old.

As - Seth then also literally waited again for another 807 more years after Enos was born - He probably took in a handful of younger unwanted women and lived full life as a Godly man with a few wives - to produce Himself more additional - un – named sons and daughters and they obviously ran off after some time. There were still no existing additional daughters of Adam available whatsoever born until 800 years after His very birth.

His son Enos – waited for 90 years before having a son named Cainan. - Cainan waited for 70 years to have a son named Mahalaleel. - Mahalaleel Waited 65 years to have Jared . - Mahalaleel literally again waited again for another 830 more years to have more un – named sons and daughters. - And Jared Waited 162 years to have Enoch. - Jared literally waited again for another 800 more years to have more un – named sons and daughters. - Enoch waited 65 years to have a son named Methuselah. And Enoch waited again for 300 years to have more un – named sons and daughters.

And Methuselah waited 187 years to have a son named Lamech. - And Methuselah waited again for 782 more years to have more un – named sons and daughters. - And Lamech waited for 182 years to have a son named Noah. - And Lamech waited for 592 more years to have un – named sons and daughters. - And Noah was 500 years old when He had Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

This is the picture we see showing a major generational gap and 500 to 800 of years of waiting periods between the Seed of Seth and other women in producing more children. It seems that they are marrying older Godly women from Adam and Seth’s countless and unmentioned attempts to establish a marriage covenant with different women - But they only produce a single son in their youth by marrying a much older women and then they try to marry again when a woman or group of women reach maturity and are unwanted or undesirable by the Younger males from the seed of Cain. And Seth’s seed is trying to make wives out of women who simply are not willing or able to make a permanent family line within Seth's family tree and it is never recorded either because they do not continue in the service of the Lords will and stay strictly in future of the Seth seed - line This is very common and happened often with the servants of God. - We see that something is going on.

The Sons of Seth’s line that are recorded by name were actually waiting through 500 to 800 years of generational gaps that combined with waiting for the women who were willing to marry them and accept that they served the Lord. And waiting for the right Godly wife or wives.. Obviously it was not an easy task. The seed of Cain simply were wicked and their lifestyle was very attractive to even many of the seed of Seth.

Only the sons born who were marrying and taking daughters of the seed of Adam and Seth combined - seemed to carry the line of Gods record and mentioning in His word as they called on the name of the Lord and walked with God and sought to please the Lord in their daily lives. The children and wives from the seed of Cain are never a part of Gods plan as being mentioned and associated with Cain. - Although if The first few Grand Sons of Seth called the Sons of God - in fact, crossed over to marrying into The Seed Of Cain they were always facing problems with a major generational gap and had to wait for hundreds of years to seek a wife or wives that they believed would be pleasing to God. - The other sons later born after the 500 to 800 year gaps are not mentioned by name and their seeds did not carry on the seed of Seth to steer clear and keep their own children and seed away and out of the society and from wandering off and mixing with the evil wicked seed and society of Cain.

As only one single / sole son was born to each individual son of Seth that had come along - that carried the seed of Adam and Seth’s true line and seed.

So, if the Sons of The line of Seth - The Sons OF God are having only Sons as the Bible shows with a wife at around the age of 60 to 100 years old and they have to also wait for another 500 to 800 more years thereafter to have more sons and daughters – they are probably waiting to add available wives and their first wives are barren.

It is very obvious that the Seed of Seth was heavily into practicing Biblical Godly Polygamy Marriage, themselves, but they would have to wait for 500 - 800 more years to find more younger adult wives to marry and they later in life end up having many daughters - after 500 - 800 years of waiting for the right women to come along - but there is a very, very un - even age gap between them as they first enter into the youth of their life - and the available wives / women are not producing any additional sons and daughters but one single son. - So the Son of Seth would had to have wait for 912 years to pass just to see a single daughter be born from the seed of Seth. Seth’s seed only had an available current, immediate and present – the first choice was by choosing from the line of Cain in marriage or waiting for hundreds of years for ( a ) someone to mature and accept them in their aging life.

Of course, there were many men and women who never married and many who served God by never getting married – but this was the common situation concerning the average Son for the descendants of Seth.

Cain and His seed had cheated both Able and Seth by Cain murdering Able – and the sons of Cain rapidly took the daughters of Adam and Eve at the start whereas the Seed of Seth was much younger and much, much older than all of The daughters that Adam always had produced.

User avatar
Falling Light 101
Apprentice
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: Sex Before Marriage is NOT a sin in the bible!!

Post #34

Post by Falling Light 101 »

.


Let’s take a look at the Greek word - ἴδιος - idios -

Just imagine if the Trinitarians Translated the following verse to say
1Pe 3:5  women also, who trusted in God, adorned / dressed ἴδιος - idios THEIR OWN
SUBJECTION unto their ἴδιος - idios OWN husbands:

If the Translation said that woman adorned and dressed themselves with THEIR OWN personal SUBJECTION


this would be like saying that women were deciding whatever they wished or whatever they personally choose or wanted to wear in dressing and clothing. In other words they just do their own person - private dress code - whatever they wanted to do - on their OWN

women also, who trusted in God, adorned / dressed ἴδιος - idios THEIR OWN
SUBJECTION

BUT THIS IS NOT HOW THE Trinitarians Translated the passage because they actually translated this verse correctly
1Pe 3:5  Women also, who trusted in God, adorned “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEMSELVES in subjection unto their ἴδιος - idios OWN husbands:

But yet, Trinitarians translate - 1Co 7:2  to say exactly what 1Pe 3:5 would be saying if they had changed the verse to say

women also, who trusted in God, adorned / dressed in
ἴδιος - idios THEIR OWN private separate
SUBJECTION

Here is the exact manuscript translation - word for word of - 1Co 7:2 
1Co 7:2  δια BY - δε ALSO - τας THIS - πορνειας IS FORNICATION, - εκαστος EACH MAN - την THEY - εαυτου THEMSELVES - γυναικα WOMAN - εχετω HAVE - και AND - εκαστη EACH WOMAN - τον THIS - ιδιον OWN - ανδρα MAN εχετω HAVE


This exact alteration, is exactly what they have inserted into - 1Co 7:2  and Trinitarians only insert and change this structure ONE SINGLE TIME in the entire translation - NEVER AGAIN do they alter and change this - again. NEVER AGAIN.
In other words - Trinitarians never again insert the word “ OWN “ into any other verse in the entire Bible - when the Greek words - εαυτου THEMSELVES - and - ιδιον OWN - are used together in the same exact sentence. THEY CHANGE THIS - ONE SINGLE TIME ONLY.
Out of all of the other instances in the ENTIRE BIBLE. - ONE SINGLE TIME ….

Lets also see what the Trinitarian Translators do in altering, changing and picking and choosing words
ἴδιος Means = OWN / PRIVATE / PERSONAL / SEPERATED / APART / - O W N
Here in - Act 1:19 
:19  at Jerusalem; the field is called in αὐτός - autos - THEIR ἴδιος - idios OWN “ tongue, Aceldama, - meaning The field of blood. 
The Trinitarian Translators change this manuscript word - ἴδιος - idios OWN
THE TRINITARIAN TRANSLATORS CHANGE THIS WORD INTO - PROPER
KJV Act 1:19  that field is called in their ἴδιος - PROPERtongue

The Greek word - ἴδιος - idios OWN “ this is not the word - PROPER
The manuscripts say - :19  at Jerusalem; the field is called in their
ἴδιος - idios - OWN “ tongue, Aceldama,

Trinitarians feel that they can take any word in the manuscript and impose any alternative meaning that they personally feel it should be changed into.

This can cause massive alterations and changes, revisions, modifications, adjustments, amendments and SHIFTING shift, alteration

This is how the Trinitarians alter and change the meaning of words
Verse :19  does not say that that the name Aceldama is the PROPER or appropriate name - it simply says that this name - Aceldama is the NAME OF THE FIELD at Jerusalem;

at Jerusalem - the field is called in their ἴδιος - idios - OWN “ tongue, Aceldama.
This is exactly what Trinitarians do throughout the entire bible -
NOTICE THE FOLLLOWING TRINITARIAN MISTRANSLATION, ABOUT MOSES
K.J.V -
Act 7:21  When he was cast out, Pharaoh's daughter took him up, and nourished him for her OWN son. 

CATHOLIC DOUAY RHEIMS -
Act 7:21  When he was exposed, Pharaoh's daughter took him up and nourished him for her “ OWN “ son. 


HERE IS THE CORRECT TRANSLATION FROM THE MANUSCRIPTS
Act 7:21  εκτεθεντα CAST OUT - δε AND - αυτον HIMSELF - ανειλετο TO BE SLAIN - αυτον HIM - η THE - θυγατηρ DAUGHTER OF - φαραω PHARAOH - και ALSO - ανεθρεψατο NURISHED UP - αυτον HIM - εαυτη HERSELF - εις TO - υιον A SON

Act 7:21  CAST OUT AND HIMSELF TO BE SLAIN, HIM THE DAUGHTER OF PHARAOH ALSO NURISHED UP HIM HERSELF TO A SON

NOTICE HOW THE TRINITARIANS INSERT / ADD IN THE WORD “ OWN “ SON - INTO THE PASSAGE
Pharaoh's daughter took him up and nourished him for herOWNson

The fact is - the Greek word “ OWN “ is not in this passage - we do not know that Pharaoh's daughter took Moses as herOWN / PERSONAL “ son, the manuscripts simply say that - THE DAUGHTER OF PHARAOH ALSO NURISHED UP HIM HERSELF TO A SON.

TRANSLATION VALIDATES THE CONCORDINANCE ..
and
CONCORDINANCE VALIDATES THE TRANSLATION..
But concordance nor translation - neither support nor validate the original manuscripts
We see that in every single last passage of scripture, whenever the two Greek words ἑαυτοῦ and ἴδιος are used in the same exact sentence
ἑαυτοῦ - heautou - Meaning = A reflexive pronoun otherwise - him (her, it, them, also [ in conjunction with the personal pronoun of the other persons my, thy, our, your) -self (-selves), etc.
and
ἴδιος - idios - Meaning = Pertaining to self, that is, ONE'S OWN; by implication PRIVATE OR SEPARATE: - - alone, apart, aside, due, his (own, (her, our, thine, YOUR) OWN PRIVATELY their (OWN).
OWNERSHIP
There is always - without exception, a clear difference of distinction that denotes the differences between the meanings of these two different words

SHOWING HOW THEY OPPOSE AND CONTRAST ONE ANOTHER DIFFERENTLY
ἴδιος - idios = OWN / PRIVATE / PERSONAL / SEPERATED / APART /
and
ἑαυτοῦ - heautou = A basic ROOT reflexive pronoun as him (her, it, them my, thy, our, your) selves)

HOW IS THE WORD - ἴδιος - idios ALWAYS USED IN THE MANUSCRIPTS ? ?

The word - ιδιον -  HIS OWN - IDIOS - is Pertaining to ONES self, that is, ONE'S OWN; by MEANING = PRIVATE OR SEPARATE: - alone, apart, aside, due, his (own, YOUR) OWN PRIVATELY their (OWN).
OWNERSHIP / SINGULAR / PRIAVTELY = FOR THE SELF.
This verse explains what the TWO DIFFERENT Greek words mean AND HOW THEY CONTRAST ONE ANOTHER
Joh 19:27  And from that hour that disciple took { Mary } unto " αὐτός - autos HIS
ἴδιος - idios OWN
autos = HIS - idios = OWN
John took Mary away from the cross to himself - privately / SEPERATED - OWN - ALONE, SECLUDED - SINGULAR - extracting - secluding her privately, their own separation - with him and her alone.

AGAIN ANOTHER MISTRANSLATION
1Co 7:1  Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 
1Co 7:2  δια BY - δε ALSO - τας THIS - πορνειας IS FORNICATION, - εκαστος EACH MAN - την THEY - εαυτου THEMSELVES - γυναικα WOMAN - εχετω HAVE - και AND - εκαστη EACH WOMAN - τον THIS - ιδιον OWN - ανδρα MAN εχετω HAVE

1Co 7:2  BY ALSO THIS IS FORNICATION, EACH MAN THEY THEMSELVES A WOMAN HAVE, EACH WOMAN THIS OWN MAN HAVE.

The women are to have their “ OWN  ιδιον idios  “ MAN - separate / individual / private  / apart / aside / alone  own.  SINGULAR SEPERATE
  And men   {{  εαυτου -    heautou  “  themselves  / themselfγυναικα WOMAN - εχετω HAVE
 Thy, our, your) -self (-selves), etc.: -  herself   himself,  (thine) own (-selves),  (-selves), they, thyself, you, your selves, -selves). 
WHEN THESE TWO WORDS ARE USED TOGETHER - IN THE SAME VERSE, HOW DO TRINITARIANS TRANSLATE THESE PASSAGES - when they are not attempting to alter and change / manipulate the meaning of the original message ?

Joh 7:18  He that speaketh of “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou himself “ seeketh his “ ἴδιος - idios OWN “ glory

Act 20:28  Take heed therefore unto “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou yourselves “ to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his ἴδιος - idios OWN blood.

CORRECT CONSISTANT TRANSLATION - when the two words are used together in the same passage
1Co 7:2  BY ALSO THIS IS FORNICATION, EACH MAN THEY ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEMSELVES A WOMAN HAVE, EACH WOMAN THIS ἴδιος - idios OWN MAN HAVE.

WHEN THESE TWO WORDS ARE USED TOGETHER - IN THE SAME VERSE, HOW DO TRINITARIANS TRANSLATE THESE PASSAGES

The Trinitarians never again insert the word “ OWN “ into any other passage when the two words
" ἴδιος - idios OWN and - ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEMSELVES
Are together in the same exact verse.

The Trinitarians ALSO never again insert the word “ OWN “ into any other passage when the two words " ἴδιος - idios OWN and - " αὐτός - autos - hesheitthey THEM

ANYTIME THESE TWO WORDS ARE TOGETHER IN THE SAME SENTENCE - the same exact verse, the Trinitarians NEVER NEVER EVER INSERT THE SECOND WORD AS “ OWN

" ἴδιος - idios OWN and - " αὐτός - autos - hesheitthey THEM

and

" ἴδιος - idios OWN and - ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEMSELVES

Never do they translate these words “ heautou and autos “ as a second additional added or inserted word - meaning “ OWN “

They do this ONLY - ONE SINGLE TIME - in the entire Translation - to IMPOSE AN ANTIPOLYGAMY NARRRATIVE.


Here is NEARLY every single instance where the word -
" ἴδιος - idios OWN is used together

in the same exact sentence - with
" αὐτός - autos - hesheitthey THEM “

and " ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEMSELVES HIM / HER SELF “


Mat 17:1  Jesus brought " αὐτός - autos - THEM " up into an high mountain apart " ἴδιος - idios – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPERATE ",

Mat 17:19  The disciples said to Jesus apart " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPERATE ", why " αὐτός - autos - WE " cannot cast the evil spirit out ?

Mat 20:17  Jesus took the disciples apart " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPERATE " and said unto " αὐτός - autos - THEM ",

Mat 24:3  The disciples said to " αὐτός - autos - HIM " privately " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPERATE ",

Mat 25:14  The man called to " αὐτός - autos - HIS " servants " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ",

Mar 4:34  when they were " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", " αὐτός - autos - HE " expounded all things to " αὐτός - autos - HIS " disciples.

Mar 7:33  And took " αὐτός - autos - HIM " aside " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", from the multitude

Mar Andrew asked " αὐτός - autos - HIM " privately " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ",

Mar 15:20  The Roman soldier put " αὐτός - autos - HIS " " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", clothes on him……….to crucify him.

Luk 9:10  Jesus took " αὐτός - autos - THEM ", and went aside privately " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", into a desert place

Joh 13:1  the Father loves " αὐτός - autos - HIS ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", which are in the world
Act 2:6  speaking in " αὐτός - autos - HIS ", " ἴδιος - idios – ALONE, APART, SEPERATE " language.

Act 3:12  by our " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATE ", power or holiness we had made " αὐτός - autos - HIM ", to walk ? 

Act 4:23  they went to " αὐτός - autos - THEIR ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", company, and reported

Act 4:32  the things which he possessed were " αὐτός - autos - HIS ",
" ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ",

Act 13:36  David had served " αὐτός - autos - HIS ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", generation by the will of God

Act 25:19  certain questions against " αὐτός - autos - HIS ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATE ", superstition

1Co 9:7  Who goeth to war any time at " αὐτός - autos - HIS ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", command ?

1Co 12:11  the SAME Spirit, divides to every man severally " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATELY, PRIVATLY ", as " αὐτός - autos - HE ", will.

1Co 15:23  every man in " αὐτός - autos - HIS ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", order:

Heb 4:10  ceasing from " αὐτός - autos - HIS ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLE ", works, as God did from his.

2Pe 3:16  they wrestle scriptures, unto " αὐτός - autos - THEIR ", " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLE ", destruction.

1Co 7:37  He that hath power over his ἴδιος - idios OWN will he will keep “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou HIS “ virgin, doing well.

2Ti 4:3  but after their ἴδιος - idios OWN lusts shall they heap to “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEMSELVES “ teachers.

Heb 7:27  Not to offer up sacrifice for his ἴδιος - idios OWNsins for this he did once, when he offered up “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou HIMSELF “

1Pe 3:5  women also, who trusted in God, adorned “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEMSELVES “ in subjection unto their ἴδιος - idios OWN husbands:

Jud 1:6  angels which kept not “ ἑαυτοῦ - heautou THEIR “ first estate, left their ἴδιος - idios OWN habitation

Joh 4:44  For Jesus " αὐτός - autos HIMSELF " testified, a prophet hath no honor in his ἴδιος - idios OWN country.

Tit 1:12  One of " αὐτός - autos THEMSELVES " , even a prophet even of their ἴδιος - idios OWN

Luk 10:34  set upon " αὐτός - autos HIS " - “ ἴδιος - idios OWN “ beast,

Joh 1:41  finding " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN
brother Simon

Joh 10:4  And when he putteth forth " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN
sheep,

Act 28:30  And Paul dwelled in " αὐτός - autos HIS ἴδιος - idios OWNHouse

Rom 8:32  He that spared not " αὐτός - autos HIS " ἴδιος - idios OWNSon

Rom 14:4  judging another man's servant? to " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWNMaster

1Co 15:38  and to every seed " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN
body.

Joh 1:11  and " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN
received him not.

Joh 8:44  Satan speaks of " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN
for he is a liar

Joh 10:3  and he calleth " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN
sheep by name

Joh 19:27  that disciple took Mary unto " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN

Act 1:7  the Father hath put in " αὐτός - autos HIS " - ἴδιος - idios OWN “ power.

Mar 6:31  And " αὐτός - autos - HE " said unto them, Come ye yourselves apart " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", into a desert place

Mar 9:2  Jesus lead them to a mountain apart " " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", by " αὐτός - autos - THEMSELVES ".

Mar 9:28  " αὐτός - autos - HIS " disciples asked him privately " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", Why could not we cast him out?

Gal 2:2  I preach to the Gentiles privately " ἴδιος - idios – – OWN - ALONE, APART, SEPARATE, PRIVATLY ", to - " αὐτός - autos - THEM ",

Never AGAIN do the Trinitarian Translators add the word “ OWN “ into these passages when these words are used together in the same exact sentence / verse - ONLY ONE SINGLE TIME IN THE ENTIRE BIBLE
In = 1Co 7:2  - O N L Y O N C E - out of nearly 100 passages
THE FACT IS - the bible never commands any man to have his ἴδιος - idios OWN " wife
NOR DOES THE BIBLE COMMAND ANY MAN ANYWHERE TO HAVE ONLY ONE WIFE.
1Co 7:2  BY ALSO THIS IS FORNICATION, EACH MAN “ την THEY “ -
“ εαυτου -    heautou   THEMSELVES

A WOMAN HAVE, EACH WOMAN THIS “ ιδιον idios  OWN “ MAN HAVE.

The passage is commanding a men to have themselves wives and the woman is commanded to have this VERY SAME OWN PRIVATE SEPARATE SINGLE ONLY MAN.

The women are to have their “ OWN  ιδιον idios  “ MAN - separate / individual / private  / apart / aside / alone  own.  SINGULAR SEPERATE
  And men,   A WOMAN HAVE εαυτου -    heautou  “  themselves  / themself
The fact is, there is no consistency - there is no GREEK GRAMMAR RULE that pertains to the altering and changing of the word - εαυτου -    heautou  “  themselves  / themself - into the word “ OWN “ Trinitarians only provide evidence based upon what is represented in the translation that they have altered - not GREEK GRAMAR RULES and not a CONSISTENT method to why or how they decide to change this word.
TRINITARIANS JUST RANDOMLY RUN THROUGH THE ENTIRE BIBLE PICKING AND CHOOSING where they personally wish to decide to alter and change or add the word “ OWN “ to the word - εαυτου -    heautou  “  themselves  / themselves.
These are all of the TOTAL verses where they have changed and inserted the word - εαυτου -    heautou  “  themselves  / themselves. Into the word “ OWN “
JUST A RANDOM PICK AND CHOOSE - HIT AND MISS METHODOLOGY where they personally feel it could apply - there is no GREEK RULE - no GRAMMAR - no FORMULA - no rhyme or reason
Just an attempt to invent a doctrinal theological - FAKE scholarly - Trinitarian Authoritative exaggerated, overstressed, embellished and amplified narrative that they FEEL should be systemically changed and inserted.
THE CONCORDANCE IS WHAT TRINITARIANS TURN TO FOR VALIDATION - NOT THE MANUSCRIPT.
NEITHER CONSISTENT GREEK GRAMMAR RULING.

User avatar
brunumb
Prodigy
Posts: 2928
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 1269 times
Been thanked: 684 times

Re: Sex Before Marriage is NOT a sin in the bible!!

Post #35

Post by brunumb »

[Replying to Falling Light 101 in post #34]

Could you kindly summarise all of that in terms of an answer to the question of whether sex before marriage is a sin or not in the bible because I just didn't get it.
Christianty: 2000 years of making it up as you go along.

User avatar
Falling Light 101
Apprentice
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: Sex Before Marriage is NOT a sin in the bible!!

Post #36

Post by Falling Light 101 »

.

Yes absolutely, thank you for the opportunity to clarify.

and I do understand that all of this detail can be overwhelming if someone is making any attempt to review and understand the entirety of my message. Basically, to summarise this.

In - 1Co 7:1  Paul is responding to a " PRE MARRIAGE " question he received, and he is answering " Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.  "

Someone is asking Paul, is it { best " - basically, good or moral for a man to not even touch a woman he is not married to, as pertaining to men and women to be touching and making types of close physical romantic contact with one another, or is it ok for a man in the Church to be caressing and touching and feeling a woman who he is not married to.

And Paul responds, saying - :2 BY ALSO THIS IS FORNICATION, EACH MAN THEY THEMSELVES A WOMAN HAVE, EACH WOMAN THIS OWN MAN HAVE.

Paul is saying that by this close contact and touching and feeling of romance before they are married and this can lead to fornication because men and women are engaging in romantic touching and then to eventually having sexual intercourse.

Paul says that each man are themselves, to have a woman and each woman is to have this own man.

So...... in other words, a man who has sex with a woman is automatically married to her and this man is to remain as this woman's own man. She should not be passed around through the church having romance and being touched and romantically involved with multiple men touching her in a way that could lead to sexual intercourse. This will cause fornication if she has sex with a man and then in the future does not remain with the man and goes to another man.

Paul is making it clear that EACH MAN THEY THEMSELVES ARE TO HAVE A WIFE, and EACH WOMAN ARE TO HAVE THIS OWN MAN. - NOT EVER HAVING SEX WITH ANOTHER MAN OR A SECOND MAN - this same man - this own man

Very simple, ..... What it is not saying in the manuscripts is " Nevertheless to AVOID fornication " this is nowhere in the manuscript.

What the length of my post was explaining is that PERTAINING TO THE MANY MULTIPLE INSTANCES that anytime that either of the two pronouns are used with the word - " ἴδιος - idios - own

Meaning anytime that - " αὐτός - autos - he, she, it, they them - is used with - " ἴδιος - idios - own

and anytime that - ἑαυτοῦ - heautou themselves - is used with - " ἴδιος - idios - own

in the same sentence / verse - anytime that either of these two pronouns αὐτός or ἑαυτοῦ are used together with the word ἴδιος - - OWN - the translators never ever translate either of these pronouns as the word " own "

NEVER ONCE IN THE ENTIRE BIBLE, - except only one single time in the entire translation, in - 1Co 7:2
all of the total instances where the pronoun is used in the same verse with the Adjective = idios = OWN
the translators never translate the pronoun as the word " own "

The Greek word - idios - is an Adjective = idios - Definition: one's own, Usage: one's own, belonging to one, private, personal; one's own people, one's own family, home, property.

A Pronoun can be changed into an Adjective if you are attempting to add an inflecting deviation to further support something in a sentence that is already existing in the storyline or narrative

But the situation involving marriage according to the manuscripts, the manuscripts do not say that a man is to have his OWN wife in the same way manner or way relating to how a woman is to have her OWN husband... this simply does not exist - it can be translated this way but this is not how the manuscripts are written.

even the following verses are not stipulating that plural, polygamy marriage is immoral or fornication or adultery

1Ti 3:2  A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of - μία – mia - one wife,
1Ti 3:12  Let the deacons be the husbands of - μία – mia - one wife,
Tit 1:6  If any be blameless, the husband of - μία – mia - one wife,

All of these instances where the translators are inserting the Greek word - μία – mia - one wife - this is not the Greek word ONE

A primary numeral 1. Is the word = - εἷς - “ Heis “ - hice / hice. Meaning = A primary numeral; one: one only.

The word in the manuscripts in these three passages - is “ MIA “ - μία – mia - mee'-ah. - meaning - A (certain person, place or thing), = also MIA can mean = first and also unity or AGREEMENT or UNITED. To agree,

The passages are not saying a bishop and leader or deacon is to have only one wife, this is not fornication -

The Greek specifically say the husband of " A " WIFE - MIA { A WIFE. the husband of a wife, deacons, bishops and leaders of the church should be married

2Co_11:2  For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to " εἷς - “ Heis one " husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

My point is - The ideas of fornication and marriage and adultery throughout the trinitarian translations simply are not supported by the manuscripts - in the way that the translators stress and inflect and proclaim - we can imagine and pretend or hope that this is what the author intended to say, but the Greek words are not strictly used in the way that they could be used within the manuscripts if they were reflecting the message within the trinitarian faith system.

all of it - has to be altered, changed, and modified, and externally STRESSED UPON by speculating anticipating, imagining, supposing, and injecting alternative meanings for what the authors did not say - but for what the translators should have believed or intended or should have written.

In other words, the translators translated many passages according to the external teaching of their own personal existing traditions and faiths and projected this onto the translation by making extra alternative edits - but these personal existing traditions are nowhere present in the manuscript.

I feel that this has created a problem for the Jews because it only adds to the struggle that the Jews face by inserting and changing the message into a conflict and hatred for the Jewish people by changing the manuscript message to portray the wives of the Hebrew men as sex slaves and abused prostitutes - when even the Italian / Canaanite word Concubine is also nowhere in the bible.

It would take multiple lengthy posts just to prove that the definition of the Hebrew word " פִּלֶגֶשׁ - pawlee yesh' " is not Concubine.

1, pâwyesh - paw - yesh' = UNITE AND BE JOIN TOGETHER, MEET OR CONNECT TOGETHER CONNECT AND JOIN YOURSELVES TOGETHER

2, אִשָּׁה - esh- shaw' - meaning = A woman - a female or a wife, woman or a wife - And = אִישׁ - 'ı̂ysh / eesh - means = any individual person and also - male or a male person

3. and pawlee = “ פָּלָא “ means = wonderful, amazing, and marvelous and great.

and pawlee yesh' - פִּלֶגֶשׁ - in Hebrew means " a wondrous connecting wife / woman" - not concubine

The Greek word for wife, is also " Gunay / Gunē - or Gumay and we even have – Greek and Hebrew historical linguistical reference Pawlee Guma - Poly gamy. - a great wife.

Imagine if Adolf Hitler did not have a trinitarian mob who used their Bible translations to equate the Jews and their laws and marriage system as the very same as Islam.

User avatar
Bradskii
Student
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 8:07 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re:

Post #37

Post by Bradskii »

Divine Insight wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2013 1:41 am
You're not supposed to lust after your spouse. In fact, you're only suppose to be having sex for the utilitarian purpose of procreation.
My wife passed her child bearing days many years ago. Were we supposed to have given up sex?

User avatar
Miles
Guru
Posts: 2401
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 128 times
Been thanked: 458 times

Re: Re:

Post #38

Post by Miles »

Bradskii wrote: Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:21 pm
Divine Insight wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2013 1:41 am
You're not supposed to lust after your spouse. In fact, you're only suppose to be having sex for the utilitarian purpose of procreation.
My wife passed her child bearing days many years ago. Were we supposed to have given up sex?
FWIW, Divine Insight made that post over eight years ago, and he hasn't posted anything else in DC&R in well over a year. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a reply.


.

User avatar
Bradskii
Student
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 8:07 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: Re:

Post #39

Post by Bradskii »

Miles wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 2:19 am
Bradskii wrote: Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:21 pm
Divine Insight wrote: Tue Jul 02, 2013 1:41 am
You're not supposed to lust after your spouse. In fact, you're only suppose to be having sex for the utilitarian purpose of procreation.
My wife passed her child bearing days many years ago. Were we supposed to have given up sex?
FWIW, Divine Insight made that post over eight years ago, and he hasn't posted anything else in DC&R in well over a year. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a reply.


.
I guess I'll carry on then. But gee, was it 8 years back? I should check the date stamps.

Post Reply