1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

King James only question

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Arbo, Dec 8, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BobinKy

    BobinKy New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
    My King James Version published by Cambridge University Press reads as follows.

    All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, (2 Timothy 3:16; KJB).​

    Out of respect for the upcoming 400th Anniversary, I choose to refer to the King James Version as the King James Bible.

    . . .

    Come on guys...cut StillLearning some slack. Focus on the content of his post and write your own post to reflect your own viewpoint, while showing respect to his viewpoint even though you may disagree.

    Can we discuss the KJBO question without all the brouhaha from either the KJBO or anti-KJBO camps?

    ...Bob
     
  2. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Yes, that is your Cambridge edition of 1762; and the Oxford was done in 1769. That is over 150 years from the KJV of 1611. I was only posting that verse to show some consistency. Most KJVO don't read the 1611 and some don't even realize that theirs isn't the 1611 edition. Obviously when there has been four or five editions of it "mistakes" have been corrected, even if they are simple printer's mistakes, spelling errors, and so on. If God inspired each one, then the fault of the spelling errors would be God's and one would have to blame God for being a bad speller. :rolleyes:

    Inspiration is only in the original MSS.
    I also believe in the preservation of God's Word. But if I took the KJVO position I could never be a missionary preaching in a foreign land in a foreign language. The KJVO's have no answer for that problem. Only 10% of the world speaks English. Did Christ die for just 10% of the world?

    (Joh 3:16) For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.

    The 400th birthday of the KJV is in the KJV of 1611 as quoted in the above verse.
     
  3. BobinKy

    BobinKy New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
    DHK...

    I think you make some valid points.

    I did not realize until I began to review the posts of LOGOS1560 just how many revisions there have been to the King James Bible over the 400-year period. Of course, I realize LOGOS1560 is not in the KJBO camp and has published his own books and articles.

    I began to examine the eight KJB editions in my own home, subjecting them to a simple 12-question purity test available on the website www.bibleprotector.com. What I found is the KJBs in my household, all published since 1900, are not consistent in the text, receiving scores ranging from from 33% to 83% pure. Here is the test for those interested.

    How pure is your King James Bible?
    1. “or Sheba” not “and Sheba” in Joshua 19:2
    2. “sin” not “sins” in 2 Chronicles 33:19
    3. “Spirit of God” not “spirit of God” in Job 33:4
    4. “whom ye” not “whom he” in Jeremiah 34:16
    5. “Spirit of God” not “spirit of God” in Ezekiel 11:24
    6. “flieth” not “fleeth” in Nahum 3:16
    7. “Spirit” not “spirit” in Matthew 4:1
    8. “further” not “farther” in Matthew 26:39
    9. “bewrayeth” not “betrayeth” in Matthew 26:73
    10. “Spirit” not “spirit” in Mark 1:12
    11. “spirit” not “Spirit” in Acts 11:28
    12. “spirit” not “Spirit” in 1 John 5:8

    Now most of these KJB purity questions are what Bible Protector calls "presentation" variations, not text variations. But it is interesting to do the test in your own household. And one could argue there are theological issues with some the test questions, such as nos. 2, 7, 10, 11, and 12.

    In my opinion, Bible Protector does have a valid point that there should be some attempt to standardize the KJB editions sold at bookstores and online vendors. But this is an expense that publishers of the KJB are not too willing to fund.

    The problem was created, according to what I have read, because of the publishing errors of the public domain KJB text (no copyright). Yet, many KJBOs prefer the no copyright aspect of the KJB.

    Many true KJBOs now use the editions published by Local Church Bible Publishers. But here again, Bible Protector states that not all of the KJB editions sold by Local Church Bible Publishers are 100% pure, just certain editions. Bible Protector makes available free online KJB editions that score 100% on their purity test, along with an inexpensive paper edition.

    My latest KJB purchase, a very nice Cambridge Leather Large Print (no notes, no references), scores high on the purity test (83%), missing questions 11 and 12. I purchased this Cambridge Large Print to replace my Oxford Old Scofield KJB, which I retired to the bookshelf in the living room. The Oxford Old Scofield scored 75% on the purity test, missing questions 7, 11, and 12. I like my new Cambridge KJB very much and do not see the need to purchase an additional edition just to score 100% on the test.

    As I have said before, I have made the commitment to use the King James Bible during the upcoming 400th Anniversary. I do not plan to use the original 1611 text that you provided. And I am not KJBO, just KJB Preferred. Unless I have a change of conviction, I will continue to use my Cambridge KJB Large Print with two other versions: New Revised Standard Version (HarperOne XL Edition) and New International Version 1984 (Cambridge Leather Single Column NIV).

    Who knows, I may become KJBO. God has worked many miracles in my life--I am 61 years old, I am retired, I have my health, I have a wonderful family, and my house is paid for! Thank you Lord!

    ...Bob
     
    #23 BobinKy, Dec 9, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 9, 2010
  4. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Good morning DHK

    You said..........
    Do you realize the contradiction of this statement.
    The original MSS no longer exist, but then you say that God has preserved his Word?!?

    This idea that “Inspiration is only in the original MSS” was rejected by everyone, over the centuries, until BB Warfield, in about 1898, declared that the copies should no longer be considered as inspired.

    But I still believe, that God has preserved His Word for us.
    --------------------------------------------------
    You also said........
    I have answered it several times.

    This would only be true, if you were a follower of Ruckman, but as I have said over and over again, the KJB is God’s Word for "English speaking people only".
     
  5. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Bob, U shouldn't pay any attention to the nonsense "Bibleprotector" spouts out. It's all his imagination. He hopes to get in on the KJVO cash cow that Ruckman & riplinger are milking.

    Many Hebrew and Koine Greek words/phrases have umpteen correct renderings in English, which has a lot more words than those older languages do. While context often dictates which one is best, it is not a 100% sure guide in Scripture translation. So, BP's stuff is just more Sensationalism, parta the falsehood of KJVO in general.

    Remember, KJVO is entirely MAN-MADE. There's not one peep of SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT,for it, not even in the KJV itself. As Christians, we shouldn't have any man-made theories in our body of doctrines of worship.
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Still Learning:...but as I have said over and over again, the KJB is God’s Word for "English speaking people only".

    PARTIALLY true. The WHOLE truth is that the KJV is ONE VERSION of God's word for English-speaking people. That's why U're "still learning"!
     
  7. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
  8. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    Obviously not.:smilewinkgrin:
     
  9. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    101
    Look kids, Big Ben! Parliament!
     
  10. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Not going to join in the mulberry bush dance, but just thought I would share that my £2 coin celebrating 400 years of the KJV came in the post yesterday.

    LINK

    Pretty cool, huh? They are only minting 20,000 of them.

    Okay, back to the monkey chasing the weasel.
     
  11. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    Are we at the "this is the way we brush our teeth" part yet?
     
  12. glfredrick

    glfredrick New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    2
    A couple of you guys were there in the usurped Anglican Church when King James was persecuting our Baptist forerunners to death... Did HE think that his translation was THE only possible Word of God? Just wondering and figured a few of you are old enough to have first hand info. :smilewinkgrin:
     
  13. Arbo

    Arbo Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2010
    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    1
    Stilllearning- Thanks for getting back. If I understand you correctly, you subscribe to the 'tried and true'. The KJ's been around longer than the other widely used english versions, and it is the one most commonly used. That is to say, 'Dad used it, his father used it, and his father used it...', and so on. It's more of a subjective thing then. Am I right or have I missed your meaning?

    Perhaps I should give a bit of my background. I currently use the NKJ, though I grew up on the KJ as well as the Living Bible. As a younger child, verses were memorized in the KJ, with the exception of Ps 91 (LB). My mother held our daily devotionals in the Living Bible, but we were aware that it was a paraphrase and what that meant. High school saw me in a private Baptist school where the KJ was used, but the reasoning behind it was for standardization. In recent years my wifey and I have attended two KJ-only churches (both very staunch in that regard).

    The most common reason I've heard for the KJ-only position has been that it's the best translation in english, and the others are corrupted to one extent or another because they differ from the KJ. Assuming the KJ to be the standard, modern versions are compared to it rather than the original hebrew, greek, and aramaic. If I remember correctly, the KJ is based on the Bishop's Bible of 1568 (if I'm wrong, please correct me). Logically, I could argue the KJ is corrupted because it differs from the Bishop's.

    I truly do respect those whose conscience dictates a KJ-only opinion, and I do desire to understand why.
     
  14. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    According to the first rule given to the KJV translators, the 1611 KJV was officially a revision of the Bishops' Bible. The KJV translators were given unbound copies of the 1602 edition of the Bishops' Bible as their starting point for their work.

    The KJV translators did make many changes to the text of the Bishops' Bible. In some cases, they updated or revised its renderings in agreement with the more-up-to-date Geneva Bible although they sometimes kept similar archaic renderings from the Bishops' in other places.

    Here are some examples from the books of Judges and Ruth.

    Jud. 1:28 waxed mighty (Bishops) was strong (KJV)
    Jud. 2:9 in the coasts (Bishops) in the border (KJV)
    Jud. 2:14 waxed hot (Bishops) was hot (KJV)
    Jud. 3:4 to wit whether (Bishops) to know whether (KJV)
    Jud. 3:15 a man lame of his right hand (Bishops) a man lefthanded (KJV)
    Jud. 3:23 gat him out (Bishops) went forth (KJV)
    Jud. 4:21 he slumbered sore (Bishops) he was fast asleep (KJV)
    Jud. 5:17 tarried in his decayed places (Bishops) abode in his breaches (KJV)
    Jud. 6:8 I fet you from Egypt (Bishops) I brought you up from Egypt (KJV)
    Jud. 6:9 And I rid you (Bishops) And I delivered you (KJV)
    Jud. 6:26 in a convenient place (Bishops) in the ordered place (KJV)
    Jud. 7:13 and me thought that a cake (Bishops) and, lo, a cake (KJV)
    Jud. 8:11 host did cast no perils (Bishops) host was secure (KJV)
    Jud. 8:13 afore the sun was up (Bishops) before the sun was up (KJV)
    Jud. 8:15 cast me in the teeth (Bishops) did upbraid me (KJV)
    Jud. 8:35 otherwise called (Bishops) namely (KJV)
    Jud. 9:17 rid you out (Bishops) delivered you (KJV)
    Jud. 9:20 But if ye have not dealt truly (Bishops) But if not (KJV)
    Jud. 9:26 gat them to Shechem (Bishops) went over to Shechem (KJV)
    Jud. 9:29 Make thine host greater (Bishops) Increase thine army (KJV)

    Jud. 9:37 folk (Bishops) people (KJV)
    Jud. 9:48 folk (Bishops) people (KJV)
    Jud. 9:48 speed your selves (Bishops) make haste (KJV)
    Jud. 9:53 his brain pan (Bishops) his skull (KJV)
    Jud. 9:54 man that bare his harness (Bishops) man his armourbearer (KJV)
    Jud. 10:6 wrought wickedness (Bishops) did evil (KJV)
    Jud. 10:11 Did not I rid you (Bishops) Did not I deliver you (KJV)
    Jud. 11:21 folk (Bishops) people (KJV)
    Jud. 11:26 in all that space (Bishops) within that time (KJV)
    Jud. 11:31 against me (Bishops) to meet me (KJV)
    Jud. 11:38 maidenhead (Bishops) virginity (KJV)
    Jud. 12:4 runagates (Bishops) fugitives (KJV)
    Jud. 13:16 Manoah wist not (Bishops) Manoah knew not (KJV)
    Jud. 14:4 father and mother wist not (Bishops) father and his mother knew not (KJV)
    Jud. 14:8 And within a short space after (Bishops) And after a time (KJV)
    Jud. 14:17 And Samson’s wife wept (Bishops) And she wept (KJV)
    Jud. 14:17 her folk (Bishops) her people (KJV)
    Jud. 15:11 Wottest thou not (Bishops) Knowest thou not (KJV)
    Jud. 16:5 silverlings (Bishops) pieces of silver (KJV)
    Jud. 16:17 I shall wax weak (Bishops) I shall become weak (KJV)
    Jud. 17:2 silverlings (Bishops) shekels of silver (KJV)
    Jud. 17:8 find a convenient place (Bishops) find a place (KJV)
    Jud. 18:10 a people that casteth no perils (Bishops) a people secure (KJV)
    Jud. 19:9 toward even (Bishops) toward evening (KJV)
    Jud. 19:11 sore spent (Bishops) far spent (KJV)
    Jud. 19:15 turned thitherward (Bishops) turned aside thither (KJV)
    Jud. 19:20 the street all night (Bishops) the street (KJV)
    Jud. 19:30 take advisement (Bishops) take advice (KJV)
    Jud. 20:6 abhomination and villany (Bishops) lewdness and folly (KJV)
    Jud. 20:10 abhomination (Bishops) folly (KJV)
    Jud. 20:22 plucked up their hearts (Bishops) encouraged themselves (KJV)
    Jud. 20:26 before the Lord (Bishops) before the LORD (KJV)
    Jud. 20:34 they wist not (Bishops) they knew not (KJV)
    Jud. 20:45 to the wilderness ward (Bishops) toward the wilderness (KJV)
    Jud. 21:4 people rose up betime (Bishops) people rose early (KJV)
    Ruth 1:1 there fell a dearth (Bishops) there was a famine (KJV)
    Ruth 1:19 Is not this Naomi (Bishops) Is this Naomi (KJV)
    Ruth 2:12 The Lord quite thy work (Bishops) The LORD recompense thy work (KJV)
    Ruth 2:17 threshed (Bishops) beat out (KJV)
    Ruth 2:20 of our affinity (Bishops) one of our next kinsmen (KJV)
    Ruth 2:22 come not against thee (Bishops) meet thee not (KJV)
    Ruth 3:15 she gat her (Bishops) she went (KJV)
    Ruth 4:22 Isai (Bishops) Jesse (KJV)
     
  15. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    I realize what the Bible teaches on this subject.

    For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Peter 1:21)
    --Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
    Those holy men of God in the OT were men like Isaiah, Samuel, Jeremiah, Moses, etc. And by extension in the NT they were Matthew, John, Peter, Paul, etc. These are the holy men of God that spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. There were no others. By the time John wrote the last book, the Book of Revelation, the canon of Scripture was closed. That is why we don't include the Book of Mormon or any other extra-Biblical book. Only these MSS were inspired, the ones written by the NT authors.

    It is true that these MSS have disappeared. Maybe that's a good thing seeing man's propensity to worship relics, and how he is prone to idolatry. But he promised to preserve his word. There is a difference between inspiration and preservation. God has preserved his word. We have the preserved word of God today.
    No, that is a false statement. In fact the very opposite is true. It was never made an issue until the KJVO people brought it up.
    So do I.
    You mean you don't care about other people? The country that I am a missionary to has only one Bible, and it is a Bible similar to the ASV, translated from the critical text. Most foreign countries are like that. The Wycliffe Bible Translators and others who have done extensive translational work in the field have done it from the CT, and not from the TR. Organizations like the Trinitarian Bible Society and Bearing Precious Seed have hardly made a dent in the world compared to these other organizations. If God sent you to such a nation what would you do? Does the nation in which I am working in have a Bible or not? It is not the KJV, so then what is it? You can't avoid the question by simply stating I am only talking about the English. That is a cop-out. The Bible, God's Word, is for all the world, just as his message is--the gospel.
     
  16. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello again DHK

    And thank you for your civil response.

    You said........
    This is an interesting idea; We all know what happened to the brazen serpent.

    But I am not convinced that the same thing would have happened to the New Testament MSS; Because they would have only been revered by the Church......
    1 Corinthians 1:22-23
    V.22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
    V.23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;


    As you can see, the Jews had this problem, because of the way God had dealt with them, but we can also see the problem the Gentiles are said to have.
    I believe this “problem”(seeking after wisdom), is at the heart of these whole issue of desiring to get away from the KJB.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next you said.......
    You are right, there is a difference between inspiration and preservation, but the two are joined at the hip.

    I think where we are in disagreement, is what we believe has been preserved.
    You believe that “the message”, is what needs to be preserved, while I believe that it’s the Words that must be preserved.
    And I have the Bible on my side.......
    Matthew 5:18
    “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”


    and

    Matthew 4:4
    “But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”

    Now I know that jots and tittles, only apply to the original language, but “verbal inspiration”, is clearly what the Lord is talking about.

    But simply preserving the message, is not verbal inspiration.
    --------------------------------------------------
    You continued.....
    Now this is interesting.
    I agree, we have God’s preserved Word today, but I believe that it has already been found and is contained in two documents.....the TR and the Masoretic Text.

    When you talk about the preserved word, you are most likely talking about “all” the MSS that are available to us today, and the never-ending “search” for which words are God’s Word, by the use of higher critical study.

    On this point we can respectfully disagree.
    But, God’s intent for His Word, was for every individual Christian, to be able to hold a copy of His Word in their hands, for his personal study.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Your next point was stronger, so my response will have to be stronger.......
    I try very hard, not to make “false statements”, and when I do, I fess up to them.
    This is not a false statement.
    In my response I mentioned BB Warfield, and although I got the date wrong, the fact is up until 1893, Christendom saw the accurate copies as inspired, until Warfield went about to re-interpret the Westminster Confession of faith(THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY AND ITS WORK by Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield).

    In this document, he forever changes the landscape of theological study, by declaring that the copies are no longer to be considered inspired.

    But the misinformation of today, goes about to change history, by making this out to be a KJBO idea.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Your next question was........
    Of course I care about other people and praise the Lord people can be saved by any valid Bible.

    Although it is a shame, for anyone to use the “wrong” MSS for translation work, but I would not call it a waste of time.
    Once they get saved, you can teach the finer points of Bible Doctrine, using whatever version you believe to be God’s Word.
    --------------------------------------------------
    You conclude by saying........
    I suppose, that I would have learned to speak their language.
    Therefore when I preached or witnessed to them, I would use Scripture, translated from the KJB.

    I have met some foolish Ruckmanite missionaries, who’s first task was to teach the people English, so that they could read the KJB.
    (I laugh at this, but it breaks my heart.)

    As you can see, this is not a question that should be avoided, but I have not been called to a foreign field, as of yet.
    But to make the distinction that the KJB is for English speaking people only, is not a cop-out; It is a necessary proclamation, because of foolishness of Ruckmanism.
     
  17. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    I have been a missionary for many years now. I do not have the translational skills that people like John of Japan do. I have studied both Greek and Hebrew, but that doesn't mean that I have the ability to translate the Bible into a foreign language.
    I am not in Canada (or the U.S.) right now. The Bible that I use is from the CT. It is the only one here, the only one available to use. No organization that I know of has printed a Bible into the language that I use that comes from the TR. I am a long term missionary.

    You glibly say: "I would use Scripture translated from the KJB."
    Let me make it plain to you: There isn't any!
    And there are many countries that are in the same boat. I tried to explain that to you in my last post. I have a KJV of the Bible, but the millions of people here don't. I don't have that option, and neither would you if God called you to such a nation.

    Your first duty is to learn the language; that is true. But learning the language of the nation does not qualify one to translate the Bible. They have a Bible. It is fairly reliable. It simply is not from the TR. And to hold up your Bible to them and say that you have the inspired Word of God, whereas they don't, doesn't make you much of a missionary, and won't help you to reach the lost for Christ.
     
  18. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    How do you feel about the passages and words in the KJV that do not come from either the TR or the MT? Are they genuine Scripture for you?
     
  19. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi DHK

    You said.......
    I have made it clear, that I am not educated, so you should expect plain language from me.
    I am here, for people to explain things to me.

    I understand that there is not a Bible in the language of your country, that has been translated from the TR, but.......certainly you use the Bible you have, when preaching to these people.

    My point was, “if” you agree with the TR, than when you are preaching in 1John 5:(for instance), wouldn’t it be possible for you to insert verse 7 into your message, and say the words, “these three are one”, in the language of those people?

    Now, it’s obvious, that you reject the TR, so you wouldn’t do this; But if I were to become a missionary to your country, and learned to speak the language; Would not I be able to do this?
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next you said.......
    I NEVER suggested, “holding up my Bible to them and saying that I have the inspired Word of God”, and that was uncalled for.
    (Reread the tone of my post!)

    All I am suggesting, is that “after people get saved”(as I said), they can be taught from a more accurate copy of the Bible.
     
  20. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello franklinmonroe

    You asked........
    I think I know what your talking about: I am aware that both Jesus and the Apostles, quoted from the LXX several times.

    My explanation of this is that Greek was the common language for that time(even in Synagogues), therefore Jesus would quote from it, because it was the language that his hearers were used to.
    --------------------------------------------------
    In fact, this in itself, answers another attack upon the KJB.

    Some have said, that the KJB should not be considered God’s inspired Word, because it is a “translation”.
    But Jesus shoots holes in this argument, because He Himself, saw a translation as inspired.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...