Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-07-2014, 12:14 PM  
Bufkin Bufkin is offline
Eat shit, asshole
 
Bufkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Casino cash: $8279
Atheism vs Theism: A discussion between Dave and Eric

While I find myself enjoying formal debates (for nostalgic purposes), I agree with Dave that a discussion is more thought provoking and ultimately will go further on this topic.

To begin, let me identify myself when I use the term "theist". I grew up in a very strict religious household which I ran away from my senior year in high school. I identified myself as an atheist up until my sophomore year of college, when I read the Bible in its entirety following the death of my best friend. While I would argue that my belief in God and the Bible can be supported intellectually, scientifically, historically, and philosophically, I would concede that my "born-again" conversion was wholeheartedly an emotional one.

Notice I said scientifically. I love science. Even though I am a philosophy major, it was the scientific arguments for a transcendant being (or lack thereof) that got me interested in the theism vs. atheism debate. I would argue that the beauty of my specific belief (Christianity) is that our worldview is not defined by a specific theory of how life began. For the atheist, it's evolution or nothing. If Darwinian Evolution is debunked, then the atheist has precious little to lean on without invoking a designer. As a Christian, I would say that I'm agnostic on a lot of parts of macroevolution. There are a lot of questions that I have regarding the theory that seem to be unanswered. With that said, accepting the theory as true in its entirety would not affect my faith in the Bible in any way, shape, or form.

I've often said that the belief in a young Earth is about as scientifically literate as saying the distance between Texas and California is 6 inches. Francis Collins was a leader on the Human Genome Project and is on the National Institutes of Health. Alister McGrath is a molecular biophysicist who teaches at Oxford University. C.S. Lewis, is well, C.S. Lewis. What do all of these brilliant minds have in common? Not only are/were they all evengelical Christians, but all accepted the theory of evolution as true. It certainly does not contradict the Old Testament when read figuratively.

So with all of that said, now you have a basic background on my faith. What say you? Did you grow up in a household that was anti-theistic? At what age did you begin to question the belief in a higher power? And perhaps the most important question I could ask you throughout all of this, what evidence would it take for you to accept a theistic worldview?
Posts: 1,293
Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 08:07 PM   #106
Pawnmower Pawnmower is offline
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $11975
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcan View Post
"Not believing" in something isn't "faith." Silly. Any more than you have "faith" that you won't be running a marathon tonight. Or when someone tells you "holy shit, there's a ghost in my kitchen" it doesn't take any faith to NOT believe that. It is in fact, a lack of faith. A lack of faith in this person's story. A lack of faith in the concept of ghosts in general. And a general disposition that if there WERE ghosts, they probably wouldn't bother with your kitchen.

I don't think we are in disagreement..but the semantics here get dull fast


1)Those who believe (positive faith, have faith)

2)Those who disbelieve (negative faith, the opposite of faith)

3) and those who neither believe or disbelieve (a 0 value, or neutral or undecided)


I really don't care what people call these 3 categories.....


The point I was REALLY trying to get at in the beginning was that science is not incompatible with spiritual faith.......

I kind of got off track with the rest of it....and really the point in bold is what applies to this thread.
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)
Posts: 14,740
Pawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 08:35 PM   #107
Pawnmower Pawnmower is offline
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $11975
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcan View Post
"Not believing" in something isn't "faith." Silly. Any more than you have "faith" that you won't be running a marathon tonight. Or when someone tells you "holy shit, there's a ghost in my kitchen" it doesn't take any faith to NOT believe that. It is in fact, a lack of faith. A lack of faith in this person's story. A lack of faith in the concept of ghosts in general. And a general disposition that if there WERE ghosts, they probably wouldn't bother with your kitchen.

I forgot my other main point:

I really don't care what name they are called , lets just say 1 & 2...

1) Is convinced there is a God/Creator and goes around sharing the good news in the hopes that he will help you get everlasting life...because of his superior spirituality will help you understand your beliefs are wrong and you should think like him

2) Is convinced there is no God and goes around trying to convince everyone and show everyone the 'lack of evidence' for a God....because of his superior intellect and information will help you understand that your beliefs are wrong and you should think like him



I personally find #2 just as offensive as #1 , in fact probably more so. Basically the same ****ign superior self serving drivel comes from out of their wind holes. I have had plenty of conversations with #1 and #2 & ironically #1 is open to much more of a discussion and seems like much more of a good person , usually, than #2.

They're both dispshits, in the end , but I hate #2 more.
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)
Posts: 14,740
Pawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 09:35 PM   #108
canoworms canoworms is offline
Starter
 

Join Date: Sep 2013
Casino cash: $5035
It's just semantics...

BUT EVERYONE MUST USE MY SEMANTICS!!!!!
Posts: 57
canoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking about
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 09:46 PM   #109
Pawnmower Pawnmower is offline
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $11975
Quote:
Originally Posted by canoworms View Post
It's just semantics...

BUT EVERYONE MUST USE MY SEMANTICS!!!!!
Not saying that at all..in fact I said go ahead and throw out your own terms...

As I said multiple times, I don't really care what the jargon is...it doesnt change the simple camps:

1)Those who believe in a creator(s)

2) Those who believe there is NO creator

3) Those who do not know what they believe, or have not decided, or have no interest in the matter, have seen no evidence but will not commit to camp #2, dont necesarily believe there is a creator but dont believe there is NOT a creator (same as the I dont know, I suppose)... etc ad naseum


That isn't semantics....arguing over the difference between a 'weak athiest' and an 'agnost' and a 'agnostic theist' is semantics
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)

Last edited by Pawnmower; 08-09-2014 at 09:55 PM..
Posts: 14,740
Pawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 10:17 PM   #110
canoworms canoworms is offline
Starter
 

Join Date: Sep 2013
Casino cash: $5035
Why not word #2 as "Those who do not believe in a creator"?

Your grouping lumps together the clergyman who mostly believes, prays everyday but harbors secret doubts and someone like myself who intentionally avoids religious activities.
Posts: 57
canoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutcanoworms is the dumbass Milkman is always talking about
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 10:34 PM   #111
ClevelandBronco ClevelandBronco is offline
Banned
 
ClevelandBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Casino cash: $6514
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/vi...iests.cnn.html
Posts: 20,345
ClevelandBronco has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 10:59 PM   #112
Pawnmower Pawnmower is offline
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $11975
Quote:
Originally Posted by canoworms View Post
Why not word #2 as "Those who do not believe in a creator"?

Your grouping lumps together the clergyman who mostly believes, prays everyday but harbors secret doubts and someone like myself who intentionally avoids religious activities.
Well, if you are harboring 'secret doubts' (doubt meaning uncertainty, in my mind) that would seem to put you in category 3. That isnt all too shocking because lots of people are in category 3.

"Intentionally avoiding 'religious activity' " is such a vague term that it could be #2 or #3........ depending on how you define it.

Some people think closing your eyes and meditating is a religious activity and some people think walking and enjoying nature is a 'religious activity'

Personally I avoid churches and many things labeled as 'religious', but that doesn't mean I avoid theism or being spiritual etc (meditation, prayer, service unto others in the name of a deity or what have you)
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)

Last edited by Pawnmower; 08-09-2014 at 11:05 PM..
Posts: 14,740
Pawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < CasselPawnmower < Cassel
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 06:27 AM   #113
Bufkin Bufkin is offline
Eat shit, asshole
 
Bufkin's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2014
Casino cash: $8279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Lane View Post
So you adhere to the belief that the bible, OT and NT, are 98% accurate and successfully reflect the alpha and omega, unchanging god except for a bit around the edges correct?
I don't want to be pressed on the 98% figure as it's just a number I threw out, but I think your statement is fair and accurate.

As for the information provided on evolution, I have no qualms whatsoever. To the guy who said "I have it all figured out", that couldn't be further from the truth. I'm more than willing to learn more, especially on scientific topics that I'm no expert on. Just don't expect me to endorse a naturalistic philosophy in the process.
__________________
Eric Fisher > You
Posts: 1,293
Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 06:29 AM   #114
Bufkin Bufkin is offline
Eat shit, asshole
 
Bufkin's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2014
Casino cash: $8279
I also notice that we have 4 conversations going on at once. If I respond to your posts awkwardly Dave, it's because I've waded through a few pages to find them. They may not be responded to in order.
__________________
Eric Fisher > You
Posts: 1,293
Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.Bufkin would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 07:31 AM   #115
WhiteWhale WhiteWhale is offline
Veteran
 
WhiteWhale's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Doo-Dah
Casino cash: $6472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pawnmower View Post


No one can "know" if God is real (or not), so you fail
Your argument is from ignorance. Words and terms are predefined. You don't determine what they mean. You simply use them improperly and sound foolish.

Agnosticism isn't a belief system. If you think it is, you are wrong. If you insist that it is, you are willfully ignorant. It's an assertion of knowledge.
Posts: 4,313
WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 09:12 AM   #116
RedNeckRaider RedNeckRaider is offline
Got highway?
 
RedNeckRaider's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Close to the big pond~
Casino cash: $6067
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale View Post
Your argument is from ignorance. Words and terms are predefined. You don't determine what they mean. You simply use them improperly and sound foolish.

Agnosticism isn't a belief system. If you think it is, you are wrong. If you insist that it is, you are willfully ignorant. It's an assertion of knowledge.
New World Encyclopedia

Agnosticism is the philosophical or religious view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly claims regarding the existence of God, gods, deities, ultimate reality or afterlife — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the subjective nature of experience.

Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods; or, alternatively, posit that while certainty may be possible for some, they personally have not come into possession of this knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of skepticism.

Agnosticism is not necessarily without a belief in God or gods. Rather, its belief is that the existence of God or gods is unknowable. It is important to note that, contrary to the more popular understanding of agnosticism merely as an agnostic attitude towards the divine, agnosticism is in fact quite a constructive project in two ways. First, as understood originally by Thomas Huxley who coined the term, it involves a serious philosophical process for approaching the question of the existence of God. Second, agnosticism can religiously issue in awareness of one's ignorance, which in turn can lead to a profound experience of the divine.
__________________
There are several ways to view the world we live in. I personally enjoy it with the wind in my face and the vibration of my bike beneath me~
Posts: 24,094
RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 09:20 AM   #117
WhiteWhale WhiteWhale is offline
Veteran
 
WhiteWhale's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Doo-Dah
Casino cash: $6472
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNR View Post
New World Encyclopedia

Agnosticism is the philosophical or religious view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly claims regarding the existence of God, gods, deities, ultimate reality or afterlife — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the subjective nature of experience.

Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods; or, alternatively, posit that while certainty may be possible for some, they personally have not come into possession of this knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of skepticism.

Agnosticism is not necessarily without a belief in God or gods. Rather, its belief is that the existence of God or gods is unknowable. It is important to note that, contrary to the more popular understanding of agnosticism merely as an agnostic attitude towards the divine, agnosticism is in fact quite a constructive project in two ways. First, as understood originally by Thomas Huxley who coined the term, it involves a serious philosophical process for approaching the question of the existence of God. Second, agnosticism can religiously issue in awareness of one's ignorance, which in turn can lead to a profound experience of the divine.
Yeah. This supports what I just said.

Agnostic can apply to both atheists and theists, but it is not a separate system of belief. Agnosticism opposes gnosticism, not atheism or theism.
Posts: 4,313
WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.WhiteWhale wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 09:46 AM   #118
RedNeckRaider RedNeckRaider is offline
Got highway?
 
RedNeckRaider's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Close to the big pond~
Casino cash: $6067
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale View Post
Yeah. This supports what I just said.

Agnostic can apply to both atheists and theists, but it is not a separate system of belief. Agnosticism opposes gnosticism, not atheism or theism.
It was not posted in rebuttal. I was merely putting it out there as general information~
__________________
There are several ways to view the world we live in. I personally enjoy it with the wind in my face and the vibration of my bike beneath me~
Posts: 24,094
RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.RedNeckRaider is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 10:57 AM   #119
Dave Lane Dave Lane is offline
Space Cadet and Aczabel
 
Dave Lane's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Kansas City, Mo, USA
Casino cash: $8130
VARSITY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Fisher View Post
I also notice that we have 4 conversations going on at once. If I respond to your posts awkwardly Dave, it's because I've waded through a few pages to find them. They may not be responded to in order.
I agree. I opened a romper room up for these other conversations to go to. Ok if you understand the difference between life origins (abiogenesis) and evolution (the explanation of diversity of life) we can move on.

One question I do have for you is why christianity? And why whatever strain of it you subscribe to? How much reading have done on other religious books, holy or otherwise?

So in your mind when you were having Eric's Comparative Religion 101 how many religions did you really give a chance? With the same zeal and effort as you did Christianity?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris616 View Post
High Tech is Sorcery and the people who are really powerful are literally telling people to commit crimes using the psychic interspace created by the WWW and Wireless. They are controlling peoples actions like drones . The two things are deeply intertwined. The more man's brain interfaces with machines the creepier it gets. They use brains separate from a human body in a supercomputer and you have The Image of the Beast. The military has been doing this since the 50s
Posts: 24,382
Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dave Lane is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 05:05 PM   #120
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6295
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNR View Post
It was not posted in rebuttal. I was merely putting it out there as general information~
Might as will take it straight from Huxley then.

From Agnosticism and Christianity, 1989:

Quote:
The extent of the region of the uncertain, the number of the problems the investigation of which ends in a verdict of not proven, will vary according to the knowledge and the intellectual habits of the individual Agnostic. I do not very much care to speak of anything as "unknowable."2 What I am sure about is that there are many topics about which I know nothing; and which, so far as I can see, are out of reach of my faculties. But whether these things are knowable by any one else is exactly one of those matters which is beyond my knowledge, though I may have a tolerably strong opinion as to the probabilities of the case. Relatively to myself, I am quite sure that the region of uncertainty–the nebulous country in which words play the part of realities [312]–is far more extensive than I could wish. Materialism and Idealism; Theism and Atheism; the doctrine of the soul and its mortality or immortality–appear in the history of philosophy like the shades of Scandinavian heroes, eternally slaying one another and eternally coming to life again in a metaphysical "Nifelheim." It is getting on for twenty-five centuries, at least, since mankind began seriously to give their minds to these topics. Generation after generation, philosophy has been doomed to roll the stone uphill; and, just as all the world swore it was at the top, down it has rolled to the bottom again. All this is written in innumerable books; and he who will toil through them will discover that the stone is just where it was when the work began. Hume saw this; Kant saw it; since their time, more and more eyes have been cleansed of the films which prevented them from seeing it; until now the weight and number of those who refuse to be the prey of verbal mystifications has begun to tell in practical life.

It was inevitable that a conflict should arise between Agnosticism and Theology; or rather, I ought to say, between Agnosticism and Ecclesiasticism. For Theology, the science, is one thing; and Ecclesiasticism, the championship of a foregone conclusion3 as to the truth of a particular [313] form of Theology, is another. With scientific Theology, Agnosticism has no quarrel. On the contrary, the Agnostic, knowing too well the influence of prejudice and idiosyncrasy, even on those who desire most earnestly to be impartial, can wish for nothing more urgently than that the scientific theologian should not only be at perfect liberty to thresh out the matter in his own fashion; but that he should, if he can, find flaws in the Agnostic position; and, even if demonstration is not to be had, that he should put, in their full force, the grounds of the conclusions he thinks probable. The scientific theologian admits the Agnostic principle, however widely his results may differ from those reached by the majority of Agnostics.

But, as between Agnosticism and Ecclesiasticism, or, as our neighbours across the Channel call it, Clericalism, there can be neither peace nor truce. The Cleric asserts that it is morally wrong not to believe certain propositions, whatever the results of a strict scientific investigation of the evidence of these propositions. He tells us "that religious error is, in itself, of an immoral nature."4 He declares that he has prejudged certain conclusions, and looks upon those who show cause for arrest of judgment as emissaries of Satan. It necessarily follows that, for him, the attainment of faith, not the ascertainment of truth, is the [314] highest aim of mental life. And, on careful analysis of the nature of this faith, it will too often be found to be, not the mystic process of unity with the Divine, understood by the religious enthusiast; but that which the candid simplicity of a Sunday scholar once defined it to be. "Faith," said this unconscious plagiarist of Tertullian, "is the power of saying you believe things which are incredible."
http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE5/Agn-X.html

/did not post the entire couple page essay
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,940
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.