Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Who buried Jesus?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by psstein View Post
    Okay, first off, I've done academic work in this field. I will tell you categorically that virtually nobody besides Koester and Crossan believes that the Cross Gospel is the earliest material and the source for all four gospels. Beyond that, the "Cross Gospel" has to get its material from somewhere, and if it's as early as Crossan thinks it is, then it likely does have some roots in eyewitness material.
    So previously you could not think of any scholars and now you can name two. Did you only just remember them? No, wait, you mentioned them earlier in the thread... How curious.

    Just to be clear here, the Cross Gospel is a very specific version of the passion narrative, and as far as I know even Koester is dubious. I am talking about a pre-Markan passion narrative, and your mention of the Cross Gospel looks, to be frank, like a straw man. As far as I can tell, the pre-Markan passion narrative is pretty well accepted.

    Nevertheless, the idea of a pre-Markan passion narrative continues to seem probable to a majority of scholars. One recent study is presented by Gerd Theissen in The Gospels in Context, on which I am dependent for the following observations.

    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/passion.html

    Despite a few dissenters, the pre-Markan Passion Narrative it is a widely accepted theory. It remains plausible to most scholars

    https://jamesbishopblog.com/2015/06/...ion-narrative/

    Whether it is based on eye witness accounts or scripture is certainly debatable. There are clearly parts that report scenes when no disciples were present, and there are numerous bits that seem to draw on scripture. Further it seems highly likely that the disciples would flee Jerusalem when Jesus was arrested, plus, of course, Jesus prophesised exactly that happening. I guess Jesus was wrong on that one.
    Secondly, the Romans, while generally unsympathetic to Jewish practice, would not be so obtuse as to leave the body on the cross overnight. Even Ehrman and Crossan, both of whom deny that Jesus was buried in a distinctive tomb, accept that Jesus's body was taken down from the cross before nightfall.
    But that was common Roman practice. Half the point of crucifixion was as a deterent, and that was made more effective if the bodies were left up there to rot. I appreciate the Romans did accommodate the Jews sometimes, and certainly that could be the case here. But to assume that the body must have been taken down on the basis of Roman practice is unjustified.

    If you are basing your argument on Roman practice, however, then it is certaion that Jesus' body was disposed of as a criminal, and not given homnourable burial in a rock tomb. The Roman's would certainly not allow the body of someone crucified for treason to be buried with honour. Further, the Jesus authorities would not allow someone accused of blasphemy to be buried with honour. Wrapped in a cloth and dumped in a common grave near the site of the crucifixion is believable. Burial in a garden tomb with 75 lbs of spices is certainly not!
    My Blog: http://oncreationism.blogspot.co.uk/

    Comment


    • Originally posted by psstein View Post
      That is very unlikely.
      Why is it unlikely? For all we know Jesus died on the Sabbath. There were no disciples there to witness it.

      It's very difficult to believe that Jesus was left on the cross for days at a time. I can't think of a single scholar who would suggest that.
      If it took him several days to die he would have been left up there until he died. He would have been taken down on the same day that he died if he was buried. But if he wasn't buried he would have been left on the cross to rot.

      The "wrong tomb" theory is pretty much universally rejected by scholars today.
      The Jews went ahead and buried him without the involvement of the family or the disciples. Assuming there is a few weeks before either the family or the disciples go to look for the tomb/grave, it wouldn't at all be surprising if they couldn't find it. It was probably unmarked in an area as you said reserved for criminals.

      Originally posted by psstein View Post
      Secondly, the Romans, while generally unsympathetic to Jewish practice, would not be so obtuse as to leave the body on the cross overnight. Even Ehrman and Crossan, both of whom deny that Jesus was buried in a distinctive tomb, accept that Jesus's body was taken down from the cross before nightfall.
      Actually Ehrman changed his mind on that, he now thinks that leaving the body on the cross is an important part of the punishment for criminals that were crucified.

      Comment


      • Mark Crucifixion Timeline.jpg
        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
        .
        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
        Scripture before Tradition:
        but that won't prevent others from
        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
        of the right to call yourself Christian.

        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

        Comment


        • Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
          Nevertheless, the idea of a pre-Markan passion narrative continues to seem probable to a majority of scholars. One recent study is presented by Gerd Theissen in The Gospels in Context, on which I am dependent for the following observations.

          http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/passion.html

          https://jamesbishopblog.com/2015/06/...ion-narrative/
          Both blogs cite Gerd Theissen

          “In my opinion, in Mark we can discern behind the text as we now have it a connected narrative that presupposes a certain chronology. According to Mark, Jesus died on the day of Passover,

          It would also seem that both blogs endorse Gerd Theissen's evaluation of Mark's writing. As can be seen from the chart in my prior post - Mark claims that the crucifixion occurred on the day before passover - so I think a little skepticism toward the claims made in the blogs is warranted here.


          Half the point of crucifixion was as a deterent, and that was made more effective if the bodies were left up there to rot. I appreciate the Romans did accommodate the Jews sometimes, and certainly that could be the case here. But to assume that the body must have been taken down on the basis of Roman practice is unjustified.
          Pilate is known to have had a penchant for sticking it to the Jewish establishment, and he wasn't overly excited about Jesus being crucified, so maybe he would be inclined to allow things that might otherwise be disapproved - even if disapproval would normally be expected.
          Last edited by tabibito; 06-18-2017, 08:13 AM.
          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
          .
          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
          Scripture before Tradition:
          but that won't prevent others from
          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
          of the right to call yourself Christian.

          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

          Comment


          • Originally posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
            Mark 15:42 explicitly states it was the day before the Sabbath. The Sabbath is on Saturday meaning the day before is Friday. What is so hard to understand about that?
            Well, yes. The 6th day of the week is the day before the Sabbath. The Jewish Preparation day of every week begins at sundown which is our Thursday evening. Our Friday begins at midnight. The evenings begin each day of the Jewish week. The 14th of that month (Exodus 12:6, 18) is mentioned in Mark 14:12. Jesus and His disciples eat the Passover that very following evening (Mark 14;17-).

            http://www.jewishgen.org/InfoFiles/m_calint.htm
            Last edited by 37818; 06-18-2017, 10:21 AM.
            . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

            . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

            Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

            Comment


            • Unbelievable:

              Leviticus 23:23 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 24 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first [day] of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. 25 Ye shall do no servile work [therein]: but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD.


              Still running with the story that a Sabbath has to be Saturday - even after direct evidence to the contrary has been posted.

              This passage tells us that the Passover is on the 14th and the Feast of Unleavened Bread begins the 15th; they are back-to-back. The first day (and the last day) of the Feast of Unleavened Bread is a Sabbath. This is a “special” Sabbath, also called a “high Sabbath”. Therefore, the Sabbath for which Y’shua had to be removed from the cross was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, not the weekly Sabbath. (The weekly Sabbath does play a part in Y’shua’s timeline, which we will shortly see.) Unlike the weekly Sabbath that is every Friday night to Saturday night, this special Sabbath can fall on any day of the week.
              http://thewayofthemessiah.org/tsp.html
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                When you can think of an objection other than sarcasm, do let me know.
                When you come up with something worthy of more than sarcasm, let me know.
                So your evidence that Mark's account is accurate is the content of Mark's acccount?

                Does that seem a little circular to you?
                Do you have a legitimate reason to discount Mark's account? Do try to come up with something that wouldn't discount every single account from antiquity.
                No, it is based on rejecting a plethora of sketchy assumptions - for example, your assumption that Mark is reliable with regards to the presence of women disciples.
                How, pray tell, is that 'sketchy'? Executions were deliberately public events (which was the norm until, oh, a century or so ago). The idea that none of the followers of Christ (or even no one willing to maliciously relate all the salacious details to the followers of Christ) were present is absurd.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                  So previously you could not think of any scholars and now you can name two. Did you only just remember them? No, wait, you mentioned them earlier in the thread... How curious.
                  Crossan and Koester are the two most prominent. There's another scholar who contributed to the Anchor Bible Dictionary who thinks similarly, but so far as I can tell, it's at best a fringe position. Iirc, Crossan originated the idea in his The Cross That Spoke.

                  Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                  Just to be clear here, the Cross Gospel is a very specific version of the passion narrative, and as far as I know even Koester is dubious. I am talking about a pre-Markan passion narrative, and your mention of the Cross Gospel looks, to be frank, like a straw man. As far as I can tell, the pre-Markan passion narrative is pretty well accepted.
                  Hold on, you're moving from one thing to another. The Cross Gospel is Crossan's reconstruction of a common passion source behind the Synoptic tradition and the Gospel of Peter, which Crossan follows Koester's work on as an independent source. If you're talking about a pre-Markan passion narrative, that's less contentious, though still debated. I'm less skeptical of a pre-Markan passion narrative.

                  Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                  Whether it is based on eye witness accounts or scripture is certainly debatable. There are clearly parts that report scenes when no disciples were present, and there are numerous bits that seem to draw on scripture. Further it seems highly likely that the disciples would flee Jerusalem when Jesus was arrested, plus, of course, Jesus prophesised exactly that happening. I guess Jesus was wrong on that one.
                  I think it's both, to be honest. Crossan and many others have seen the passion narrative as "prophecy historicized," which, while not necessarily implausible, seems to be only half the story. I think the passion narrative itself a combination of "history scripturalized," so Scriptural references added to history, as well as "prophecy historicized." I don't want to put words in your mouth, but there's often this strange belief among people that the Jesus movement consisted of him, his 12 disciples, and a few hangers-on. I think that's wrong. Jesus' inner circle (the Twelve) fled.

                  Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                  But that was common Roman practice. Half the point of crucifixion was as a deterent, and that was made more effective if the bodies were left up there to rot. I appreciate the Romans did accommodate the Jews sometimes, and certainly that could be the case here. But to assume that the body must have been taken down on the basis of Roman practice is unjustified.
                  I'm not assuming it. I'm arguing it based on the fact that you wouldn't leave a body up over the Sabbath, especially when it's Passover. Passover is one of the two festival holidays, and every Jew in the Roman Empire is coming to Jerusalem. Leaving a body on a cross is a really good way to offend them.

                  Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                  If you are basing your argument on Roman practice, however, then it is certaion that Jesus' body was disposed of as a criminal, and not given homnourable burial in a rock tomb. The Roman's would certainly not allow the body of someone crucified for treason to be buried with honour. Further, the Jesus authorities would not allow someone accused of blasphemy to be buried with honour. Wrapped in a cloth and dumped in a common grave near the site of the crucifixion is believable. Burial in a garden tomb with 75 lbs of spices is certainly not!
                  Let's not conflate burial accounts. The Markan account is rather plausible; Jesus is dishonorably buried by Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Sanhedrin. It is not "certain" that Jesus's body was disposed of as a criminal; we have evidence that that was not the case around Jerusalem. Beyond that, the accusation of blasphemy is almost certainly ahistorical.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Aractus View Post
                    Actually Ehrman changed his mind on that, he now thinks that leaving the body on the cross is an important part of the punishment for criminals that were crucified.
                    Going off Ehrman's How Jesus Became God, the last book he wrote with this specific issue in mind, he believes that the body was taken off the cross, and then (possibly) buried in a common grave. What he argues is that there's not enough evidence to say that Joseph buried Jesus, but also not enough to say he definitely didn't.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                      This passage tells us that the Passover is on the 14th and the Feast of Unleavened Bread begins the 15th; they are back-to-back. The first day (and the last day) of the Feast of Unleavened Bread is a Sabbath. This is a “special” Sabbath, also called a “high Sabbath”. Therefore, the Sabbath for which Y’shua had to be removed from the cross was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, not the weekly Sabbath. (The weekly Sabbath does play a part in Y’shua’s timeline, which we will shortly see.) Unlike the weekly Sabbath that is every Friday night to Saturday night, this special Sabbath can fall on any day of the week.
                      http://thewayofthemessiah.org/tsp.html
                      The 15th of Nisan never falls on a Monday, Wednesday or a Friday.

                      The 14th of Nisan fell on the following days,
                      26 A.D. on a Friday.
                      27 A.D. on a Wednesday.
                      28 A.D. on a Monday.
                      29 A.D. on a Saturday.
                      30 A.D. on a Wednesday. Mark 14:12.
                      31 A.D. on a Monday.
                      32 A.D. on a Monday.
                      33 A.D. on a Friday.
                      34 A.D. on a Monday.
                      35 A.D. on a Monday.
                      36 A.D. on a Friday.

                      Tradition had long held that the 14th of Nisan was on a Friday in 30 A.D. Sir Issac Newton Calculated that date did not work. Recalculated the date for a Friday in 34 A.D. To be revised for Friday 33 A.D. As commonly held to be that year today.
                      . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                      . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                      Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                        The 15th of Nisan never falls on a Monday, Wednesday or a Friday.
                        Doesn't, yes: didn't, no. Those rules were introduced sometime after AD 200.

                        The 14th of Nisan fell on the following days,
                        26 A.D. on a Friday.
                        27 A.D. on a Wednesday.
                        28 A.D. on a Monday.
                        29 A.D. on a Saturday.
                        30 A.D. on a Wednesday. Mark 14:12.
                        31 A.D. on a Monday.
                        32 A.D. on a Monday.
                        33 A.D. on a Friday.
                        34 A.D. on a Monday.
                        35 A.D. on a Monday.
                        36 A.D. on a Friday.
                        The chart is presented as if the rules preventing two sabbaths falling on consecutive days were in force during the first century. They weren't.

                        "In the time of the Sanhedrin there were no published calendars as there are today. The Sanhedrin declared the beginning of each month when the moon was actually sighted.

                        The rules of the perpetual calendar also ensure that the first day of Rosh Hashanah will never take place on Sunday, Wednesday or Friday. http://www.chabad.org/library/articl...wish-Month.htm

                        According to many, this rule took effect when the perpetual calendar was put in place in the 4th century by Hillel II
                        - Not that the claim isn't disputed, but -

                        When Hillel established the perpetual calendar, he sanctified every Rosh Chodesh until Moshiach will come and reestablish the Sanhedrin.
                        "It is uncertain what the calendar of Hillel originally contained, and when it was generally adopted. In the Talmud there is no trace of it."
                        http://www.truthontheweb.org/admit.htm
                        The Jewish calendar is supposed to be, and originally was, based on the ongoing proclamations of the Sanhedrin. (See How does the Jewish calendar work?) Only a Sanhedrin which was ordained in the Land of Israel was allowed to consecrate Rosh Chodesh or designate a Leap Year.
                        In the 4th century CE, the sage Hillel II foresaw that the Jews would be exiled from Israel, and be spread over the entire globe, therefore they would no longer be able to follow a Sanhedrin-based calendar. So Hillel and his rabbinical court established a perpetual calendar. They consecrated all the Rosh Chodeshim and leap years until Moshiach will come and reestablish the Sanhedrin. http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/2...-calendar.html


                        As can be seen, the Talmud records no advance calculations in place, so consecutive sabbaths could not have been taken into consideration when the start of a month was declared: any adjustment would have to be ad hoc.


                        Tradition had long held that the 14th of Nisan was on a Friday in 30 A.D. Sir Issac Newton Calculated that date did not work. Recalculated the date for a Friday in 34 A.D. To be revised for Friday 33 A.D. As commonly held to be that year today.
                        It seems to me that AD 30 gets ruled out for a number of reasons. But if the phases of the moon are adhered to, Nisan 1 AD 33 was on March 19, which makes Nisan 15 not 6 pm Friday 2 April to 6pm Saturday 3 April, but a day earlier: WEDNESDAY 6 pm to THURSDAY 6 pm would have been the day of preparation.
                        Last edited by tabibito; 06-19-2017, 04:42 AM.
                        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                        .
                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                        Scripture before Tradition:
                        but that won't prevent others from
                        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                        of the right to call yourself Christian.

                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          Leviticus 23:23 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 24 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first [day] of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. 25 Ye shall do no servile work [therein]: but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD.

                          Saturdays are not the only days termed sabbaths.

                          26 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 27 Also on the tenth [day] of this seventh month [there shall be] a day of atonement: ... 32 It [shall be] unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in the ninth [day] of the month at even, from even unto even, shall ye celebrate your sabbath.

                          The first and tenth days of the same month cannot both be Saturdays.

                          Sabbath means a day (or even a year, at times) that is Holy to the Lord. It does not strictly refer to the weekly Sabbath.

                          Even AFTER the fact that a sabbath is not necessarily a Saturday was stated TWICE (posts 158 and 160), still you persist in declaring the nonsense that a Sabbath is necessarily a Saturday.

                          Added to that, Fridays, that is the day before the weekly sabbath, to the best of my knowledge, are not called days of preparation - except by people looking for excuses to deny that the Bible says what it does.
                          Why should we believe the ad hoc assertion that Mark didn't mean to depict the weekly Sabbath? Where are the textual indicators that show this? And this still does nothing to get you out of the fact that Mark has Jesus crucified, killed, and buried on Passover since it's literally the next day after they eat the Passover meal in the evening which signifies the beginning of Passover.

                          What about in Matthew who makes it explicit that it was the weekly Sabbath (Saturday)?

                          Mt. 28:1
                          "After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb."
                          Last edited by RhinestoneCowboy; 06-19-2017, 03:38 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Also Mark 16:1-2

                            "And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
                            And very early in the morning the first day of the week (Sunday), they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun."


                            All evidence points to this being the weekly Sabbath i.e. Saturday.

                            Comment


                            • tabibitio,

                              As you know I am of the opinion that Mark 14:12 was on the 14th of Nisan our Wednesday in the Julian year 30 A.D.
                              Which places the crucifixion on the 15th of Nisan on our Thursday.

                              What do you understand for Mark 14:12? Please explain. Thanks.
                              . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                              . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                              Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
                                Why should we believe the ad hoc assertion that Mark didn't mean to depict the weekly Sabbath? Where are the textual indicators that show this? And this still does nothing to get you out of the fact that Mark has Jesus crucified, killed, and buried on Passover since it's literally the next day after they eat the Passover meal in the evening which signifies the beginning of Passover.
                                The answer is in the text itself - which would have been self evident if you had checked the chart against what is written by Mark.

                                What about in Matthew who makes it explicit that it was the weekly Sabbath (Saturday)?

                                Mt. 28:1
                                "After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb."
                                ?!? What do the events of the morning of resurrection have to say about the day that Jesus died? And what does the record of Matthew have to say about the record of Mark?
                                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                                .
                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                                Scripture before Tradition:
                                but that won't prevent others from
                                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                428 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                305 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,518 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X