Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Ex 16-18 vs Num 11

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by apostoli View Post
    If so, then why did Moses plead with YHWH to heal Miriam of the leprosy that YHWH had just inflicted upon her?
    "Leaving vengeance to God" doesn't mean that you don't pray for your sick sister.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by RBerman View Post
      "Leaving vengeance to God" doesn't mean that you don't pray for your sick sister.
      I suspect you are missing the point of Numbers 12. There is depicted an obvious conflict between Moses and the priesthood...YHWH intervened, basically said that while amoungst the priesthood there are prophets, he (YHWH), one on one, only talks to Moses. Miriam seems to be the the chief culprit in causing the conflict between Moses and Aaron, thus it is her that is exclusively punished.

      All that aside you have still not reconiled the parallel circumstances of Ex 16-18 and Num 11. Namely, in both circumstances...

      1. The Israelites sojourn in the desert
      2. They are hungry. God sends them manna.
      3. They hunger for meat. God sends them partridges.
      4. Moses needs an administrative support structure.

      According to Numbers the Israelites are on the verge of stoning Moses and Moses can no longer take the pressure. In Exodus everything seems OK, and Jethro suggests a way for Moses to relieve his day to day burden. A big problem, is that you have yet to lay an argument supported by scripture. You still need to present an emphatic accounting of the background story ie: the sojourn in the desert, the manna and the partridges as a replication of events, which effectively produced the Judges...

      As I appealed earlier, you need to explain what happened to the Judges that Moses had appointed two years earlier under identical circumstances? What was the necessity of the 70?

      I can, imaginatively, do a reconciliation, but, imo, it wouldn't stand up in court ;-{

      If you are confounded by the biblical evidence then just say so...
      Last edited by apostoli; 05-23-2014, 08:17 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by apostoli View Post
        I suspect you are missing the point of Numbers 12. There is depicted an obvious conflict between Moses and the priesthood...YHWH intervened, basically said that while amoungst the priesthood there are prophets, he (YHWH), one on one, only talks to Moses. Miriam seems to be the the chief culprit in causing the conflict between Moses and Aaron, thus it is her that is exclusively punished.

        All that aside you have still not reconiled the parallel circumstances of Ex 16-18 and Num 11. Namely, in both circumstances...

        1. The Israelites sojourn in the desert
        2. They are hungry. God sends them manna.
        3. They hunger for meat. God sends them partridges.
        4. Moses needs an administrative support structure.

        According to Numbers the Israelites are on the verge of stoning Moses and Moses can no longer take the pressure. In Exodus everything seems OK, and Jethro suggests a way for Moses to relieve his day to day burden. A big problem, is that you have yet to lay an argument supported by scripture. You still need to present an emphatic accounting of the background story ie: the sojourn in the desert, the manna and the partridges as a replication of events, which effectively produced the Judges...

        As I appealed earlier, you need to explain what happened to the Judges that Moses had appointed two years earlier under identical circumstances? What was the necessity of the 70?

        I can, imaginatively, do a reconciliation, but, imo, it wouldn't stand up in court ;-{

        If you are confounded by the biblical evidence then just say so...
        A "reconciliation" is only necessary if you think they are the same event, and you are trying to explain why the descriptions differ at various points. Instead what we have are two stories, within the sameforty year time frame, which have some points of overlap and some points of difference.

        Exodus 16-18
        1) The Israelites, fresh out of Egypt, have run out of food.
        2) God sends quail as a temporary measure.
        3) God provides manna as a long-term solution.
        4) Noah needs help mediating the squabbles of the people. At Jethro's advice, he sets up a series of appellate courts.

        Numbers 11
        1) The people are sick of eating manna all the time.
        2) Noah can't handle their constant griping to him, and God gives him seventy Spirit-filled men to act as a buffer and hear the complaints.
        3) God sends quail that make them sick for complaining.

        So there are no "identical circumstances." There is only the reality that, when wandering homeless in the Sinai desert for years, issues of food and governance will be chronic problems that have to be addressed and re-addressed.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by RBerman View Post
          A "reconciliation" is only necessary if you think they are the same event, and you are trying to explain why the descriptions differ at various points. Instead what we have are two stories, within the sameforty year time frame, which have some points of overlap and some points of difference.
          in the two accounts we are not dealing with a forty year period but 26 months in which identical circumstances are related. If you actually decide to read scripture, you will find that there is no overlap but equivalence of identical circumstances that, as a single event, are in descrepency by two years.

          Originally posted by RBerman View Post
          Exodus 16-18
          1) The Israelites, fresh out of Egypt, have run out of food.
          In Numbers the Israelites had been out of Egypt for over two years, In Exodus only a couple of weeks/months. The texts don't support your assumptions. The Israelites are depicted as experiencing a one off event - a miracle in both accounts of the one event! (one account of two events if you count the partridges).

          Originally posted by RBerman View Post
          2) God sends quail as a temporary measure.
          But first he sends manna in both accounts and then in response to the Israelites complaints, in both accounts, he engorges them with partridges.

          Originally posted by RBerman View Post
          3) God provides manna as a long-term solution.
          As far as I have gleaned there is no scripture that supports your assumption of a long term solution. You seem to have ignored the partridges which your opinion regarding seperate events always followed the manna, and subsequently the redistribution of Moses' authority...

          Originally posted by RBerman View Post
          4) Noah needs help mediating the squabbles of the people. At Jethro's advice, he sets up a series of appellate courts.
          Noah? Moses would be a better bet! But let us let your lapse pass...

          You aren't being attentive to the problem as your "Noah" slip indicates.

          In Exodus, Moses has taken to himself to shoulder all the administrative needs of the Israelites. Jethro advises him to outsource (distribute his responsibilities). in Numbers, Moses is crumbled, can't take the pressure anymore and appeals for YHWH's help - which results in the diminution of Moses' power (ie: his Spirit is fragmented and distributed amoungst the 70).

          Originally posted by RBerman View Post
          Numbers 11
          1) The people are sick of eating manna all the time.
          2) Noah can't handle their constant griping to him, and God gives him seventy Spirit-filled men to act as a buffer and hear the complaints.
          3) God sends quail that make them sick for complaining.
          For someone who pretends to advocate the inefficacy of scripture, it is revealing that you resort to such twisting, poking and prodding of scripture to make it fit your opinion. For now, I'll put such down to what appears your current Noahic condition (see Gen 9:21)

          Originally posted by RBerman View Post
          So there are no "identical circumstances." There is only the reality that, when wandering homeless in the Sinai desert for years, issues of food and governance will be chronic problems that have to be addressed and re-addressed.
          Hey, there is only a difference of around 20-24 months between when the accounts of Exodus and Numbers occurred. And these accounts are identical (except for the why/how of Moses' abrogation)and are unique in scripture. I really wish you would focus on the issues at hand and not introduce extrapolations that have no scriptural support.
          Last edited by apostoli; 05-24-2014, 02:42 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by apostoli View Post
            in the two accounts we are not dealing with a forty year period but 26 months in which identical circumstances are related. If you actually decide to read scripture, you will find that there is no overlap but equivalence of identical circumstances that, as a single event, are in descrepency by two years.
            I don't know why you assume I have not read the Scripture. You are of course correct about the time interval between these two events, but my point was larger: Over the course of forty years in the wilderness, stuff like this probably happened all the time, not just twice.

            In Numbers the Israelites had been out of Egypt for over two years, In Exodus only a couple of weeks/months. The texts don't support your assumptions. The Israelites are depicted as experiencing a one off event - a miracle in both accounts of the one event! (one account of two events if you count the partridges).
            Obviously a miracle that happened twice was not a "one off event." (I already mentioned the two times that Jesus fed large crowds with a small meal; do you think that was only one event too, even though Mark's gospel references the fact that it was two different times?) It's only your prior decision to try to squeeze both stories into the same event that generates all these problems.

            But first he sends manna in both accounts and then in response to the Israelites complaints, in both accounts, he engorges them with partridges.
            Not exactly. In Exodus 16, he announces the coming manna, but before the manna has even arrived, the quails do.
            In the evening quail came up and covered the camp, and in the morning dew lay around the camp. And when the dew had gone up, there was on the face of the wilderness a fine, flake-like thing, fine as frost on the ground. (Exodus 16:13-14)

            As far as I have gleaned there is no scripture that supports your assumption of a long term solution. You seem to have ignored the partridges which your opinion regarding seperate events always followed the manna, and subsequently the redistribution of Moses' authority...
            See above about the timing of the manna and quails the first time around. As far as whether there was a long term solution, surely you don't think the Israelites wandered for forty years in the wilderness without (1) food, and (2) a governmental hierarchy beyond "Moses at the top, and everyone else underneath"?

            Noah? Moses would be a better bet! But let us let your lapse pass...
            Whoops. Thanks for the gracious response. Sometimes I'm amazed at the words that slip from my fingers.

            You aren't being attentive to the problem as your "Noah" slip indicates.
            Oh well, so much for graciousness. It was nice for the brief period between your sentences. Anyway...

            In Exodus, Moses has taken to himself to shoulder all the administrative needs of the Israelites. Jethro advises him to outsource (distribute his responsibilities). in Numbers, Moses is crumbled, can't take the pressure anymore and appeals for YHWH's help - which results in the diminution of Moses' power (ie: his Spirit is fragmented and distributed amoungst the 70).
            Exactly. The circumstances were somewhat different, as were the process and the solution.

            Hey, there is only a difference of around 20-24 months between when the accounts of Exodus and Numbers occurred. And these accounts are identical (except for the why/how of Moses' abrogation)and are unique in scripture. I really wish you would focus on the issues at hand and not introduce extrapolations that have no scriptural support.
            As we have seen, the accounts, while sharing similarities that should not surprise us given the Israelites situation, have differences due to the circumstances of their respective moments.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by RBerman View Post
              I don't know why you assume I have not read the Scripture. You are of course correct about the time interval between these two events, but my point was larger: Over the course of forty years in the wilderness, stuff like this probably happened all the time, not just twice.
              Yet scripture is silent.

              Earlier you suggested that if x is in scripture you'd believe it, if it isn't you won't. Your speculations are absent from scripture. So what is your stance now?

              In your opinion, what happened to Moses' appointment of the judges in Exodus? Was his "inspired" decision such a failure that it required YHWH's intervention? Why was it necessary for YHWH to diminish Moses' spirit and reallocate it to the replacement 70? None of these questions can be answered directly from scripture.

              We know from scripture that the judges system was a dismal failure, ultimately becoming so corrupt the people pleaded for a king to be enthroned to rule instead of the judges. We also know the "king" idea was a dismal failure. If both were YHWH instigated then scripture would indicate YHWH is/was a failure! However, if both ideas were man made then YHWH is off the hook. Numbers indicates the 70 are God's idea, Exodus indicates that they were Jethro's/Moses' idea.

              If Exodus & Numbers provide two separate events with parallel circumstances then YHWH is proved a failure in his dealings with Israel. If Numbers is a priestly redaction revisiting the same event, then YHWH is off the hook.

              Of course there is another explanation I could give to reconcile the two accounts, but such would be idle speculation...and you have indicated you have no tolerance for idle speculation...
              Last edited by apostoli; 05-24-2014, 12:40 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by apostoli View Post
                Yet scripture is silent. Earlier you suggested that if x is in scripture you'd believe it, if it isn't you won't. Your speculations are absent from scripture. So what is your stance now? In your opinion, what happened to Moses' appointment of the judges in Exodus? Was his "inspired" decision such a failure that it required YHWH's intervention? Why was it necessary for YHWH to diminish Moses' spirit and reallocate it to the replacement 70? None of these questions can be answered directly from scripture.
                As you say, Scripture is silent, so we don't know for sure. For that matter, we only know a few times that the Israelites ate, and none that they ever "relieved themselves" in the wilderness. But presumably those sorts of maintenance functions went on every day, without being documented. Presumably the normal operations of society (child-rearing, cleaning, judges adjudicating disputes) went on every day, though Scripture doesn't specifically say so. So no, I don't think the legal system instituted in Exodus 18 was a "failure." However, the seventy elders of Numbers 11 had a different job than those judges, as I described previously.

                We know from scripture that the judges system was a dismal failure, ultimately becoming so corrupt the people pleaded for a king to be enthroned to rule instead of the judges. We also know the "king" idea was a dismal failure. If both were YHWH instigated then scripture would indicate YHWH is/was a failure! However, if both ideas were man made then YHWH is off the hook. Numbers indicates the 70 are God's idea, Exodus indicates that they were Jethro's/Moses' idea.
                We know that the national judgeship ultimately became corrupt by the time of Eli and his sons. They wanted a new president, as it were. That's a separate question from whether more local government was functioning, as when Ruth and Boaz had their issues ironed out by the elders at the gates of the city.

                Furthermore, God ordaining something doesn't mean that the results will be great; God ordained Saul to be king of Israel, in order to chastise Israel; Saul turned out to be a corrupt king. So if you wanted to argue that the Levitical law was like that (ordained by God, yet actually bad), then at least you'd be somewhat closer to reality than saying that God never ordained the Levitical law in the first place, even though the first words of the book of Leviticus are, "The Lord called Moses and spoke to him from the tent of meeting, saying,..." But even then, you'd have to reckon with the many places in the Bible that praise "the Law," meaning the Mosaic Code. They'd have to all be wrong too.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by RBerman View Post
                  ...the seventy elders of Numbers 11 had a different job than those judges, as I described previously.
                  What was their "different job" according to scripture? Moses had already implemented the judges for administrative affairs and the levites for religious affairs, what is left in the governance of Moses' people for the 70 to do? Were they a police force that checked that the judges and religious leaders were doing their job correctly? If so, from scriptural and historical accounts of the judges and levitical system, they were a dismal failure. Jethro had advised Moses to delegate his day to day activities but he should preside over greater matters. Now from Numbers 11 we find Moses couldn't cope with the pressure so (speculatively) YHWH implemented a council of seventy elders. If it wasn't for Numbers 12 that scenario would seem to settle things (as long as we ignore the Israelites sojourn in the desert and the consequent appearance of the manna and the partridges and the consequential episode of Moses' delegating his power/s).

                  Originally posted by RBerman View Post
                  Furthermore, God ordaining something doesn't mean that the results will be great; God ordained Saul to be king of Israel, in order to chastise Israel; Saul turned out to be a corrupt king.
                  Actually God did not ordain Saul he anointed him, in the same way that he (God) anointed the the pagan king Cyrus to conquer Israel and then rule over Israel in exile.

                  David might be demonstrated to be morally corrupt and blood thirsty (the later being the reason he was prohibited from implementing his aspiration of making Jerusalem (his capital) yhe centre of religious devotion). He too was anointed, but scripture no where indicates that God sanctioned any of his activities (except for maybe David having himself worshiped in equivalence to YHWH)..

                  ps: I'm not aware of scripture ever depicting Saul as corrupt. Defective and self possessed possibly. corrupt - not that I can find.

                  Originally posted by RBerman View Post
                  closer to reality than saying that God never ordained the Levitical law in the first place, even though the first words of the book of Leviticus are, "The Lord called Moses and spoke to him from the tent of meeting, saying,..." But even then, you'd have to reckon with the many places in the Bible that praise "the Law," meaning the Mosaic Code. They'd have to all be wrong too.
                  Have a close read of the NT, whenever Jesus referred to the Law he always pointed to and quoted from the Decalogue. Whenever he referred to the Mosaic law he was highly critical...

                  As I suggested earlier, have a close read of Levitcus and you will find that Jesus' sacrifice is invalid under the levitical rules. Probably why he is high priest according the order of Melchizedek and not counted amoungst the Cohen of the levites.
                  Last edited by apostoli; 05-25-2014, 01:34 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by apostoli View Post
                    He too was anointed, but scripture no where indicates that God sanctioned any of his activities (except for maybe David having himself worshiped in equivalence to YHWH).
                    An assertion which was already disproved in Post #57

                    http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...amp-Paul/page6

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                      Originally posted by apostoli
                      He [David] too was anointed, but scripture no where indicates that God sanctioned any of his activities (except for maybe David having himself worshiped in equivalence to YHWH).
                      An assertion which was already disproved in Post #57

                      http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...amp-Paul/page6
                      Did YHWH sanction the statutory rape and adultery of Bathsheba, and the consequent murder of her husband? From the scriptural account, definitely not. Did YHWH sanction David's blood lust? From the scriptural account, definitely not! Did YHWH sanction David's territorial aspirations. Apparently not. His kingdom quickly crumbled.

                      I presume you are relying on your final comment in post #57 of the thread "Determinism & Paul" ...

                      Originally posted by foudroyant
                      Despite his faults the LORD pointed out that David had done good.
                      This is what the LORD said unto Solomon concerning David:
                      As for you, if you will walk before Me as your father David walked, in integrity of heart and uprightness, doing according to all that I have commanded you and will keep My statutes and My ordinances then I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever, just as I promised to your father David, saying, 'You shall not lack a man on the throne of Israel.' (1 Kings 9:4, NASB)
                      Point of fact, there is no indication that YHWH rewarded David or later kin for having "had done good". David's kingdom was crumbling in his life time, and ultimately collapsed under Solomon's line, to the point that his line was cursed by YHWH (ie: why any claim to the throne of David via Joseph for Jesus is invalid if Jesus was natural offspring of Joseph).

                      Possibly your antagonism is towards my current statement (not covered in the post you cite) that David had himself worshiped in equivalence to YHWH. If so, read 1 Chronicles 2:29 where it is plainly stated that David was worshiped along with YHWH by the Israelites of the time...

                      ps: I just checked to see what I had replied to your post #57 of the thread "Determinism & Paul" and discovered I never did. Sorry about that. It seems phat8594, dacristoy and RBerman took over the thread and your post got lost in the mix...
                      Last edited by apostoli; 05-25-2014, 02:51 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        For you to assert that God didn't sanction any of David's activities goes against the evidence now presented:

                        David kept true to the covenant he made with Jonathan (1 Samuel 20:15-17) by caring for Meshibosheth which was a good thing.
                        Then David said, "Is there yet anyone left of the house of Saul, that I may show him kindness for Jonathan's sake?"
                        Now there was a servant of the house of Saul whose name was Ziba, and they called him to David; and the king said to him, "Are you Ziba?" And he said, "I am your servant."
                        The king said, "Is there not yet anyone of the house of Saul to whom I may show the kindness of God?" And Ziba said to the king, "There is still a son of Jonathan who is crippled in both feet." (2 Samuel 9:1-3, NASB)

                        Before his death David provided an abundant amount of materials for Solomon to build the Temple which was a good thing.
                        But the LORD said to my father David, Because it was in your heart to build a house for My name, you did well that it was in your heart. (1 Kings 8:18, NASB cf. 1 Chronicles 28:19)

                        Despite his faults th LORD pointed out that David had done good.
                        This is what the LORD said unto Solomon concerning David:
                        As for you, if you will walk before Me as your father David walked, in integrity of heart and uprightness, doing according to all that I have commanded you and will keep My statutes and My ordinances then I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever, just as I promised to your father David, saying, 'You shall not lack a man on the throne of Israel.' (1 Kings 9:4, NASB)

                        Added to this is that David killed Goliath.
                        ---------------------------------------------------
                        And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the LORD your God. And all the congregation blessed the LORD God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the LORD, and the king. (1 Chronicles 29:20, KJV)

                        David did not have himself worshiped in equivalence to God in the same way Naboth was not accused of blaspheming "God and the king" in equivalence (1 Kings 21:13, KJV).
                        In both instances what was done unto God is in the absolute - not so concerning what was said to have been done unto people.

                        The same would apply here:
                        serve now the LORD your God, and his people Israel (2 Chronicles 35:3, KJV).
                        The word used in the LXX is a derivative of latreuw - the worship due unto God alone.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                          For you to assert that God didn't sanction any of David's activities goes against the evidence now presented:

                          David kept true to the covenant he made with Jonathan (1 Samuel 20:15-17) by caring for Meshibosheth which was a good thing.
                          Then David said, "Is there yet anyone left of the house of Saul, that I may show him kindness for Jonathan's sake?"
                          Now there was a servant of the house of Saul whose name was Ziba, and they called him to David; and the king said to him, "Are you Ziba?" And he said, "I am your servant."
                          The king said, "Is there not yet anyone of the house of Saul to whom I may show the kindness of God?" And Ziba said to the king, "There is still a son of Jonathan who is crippled in both feet." (2 Samuel 9:1-3, NASB)

                          Before his death David provided an abundant amount of materials for Solomon to build the Temple which was a good thing.
                          But the LORD said to my father David, Because it was in your heart to build a house for My name, you did well that it was in your heart. (1 Kings 8:18, NASB cf. 1 Chronicles 28:19)

                          Despite his faults th LORD pointed out that David had done good.
                          This is what the LORD said unto Solomon concerning David:
                          As for you, if you will walk before Me as your father David walked, in integrity of heart and uprightness, doing according to all that I have commanded you and will keep My statutes and My ordinances then I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever, just as I promised to your father David, saying, 'You shall not lack a man on the throne of Israel.' (1 Kings 9:4, NASB)

                          Added to this is that David killed Goliath.
                          ---------------------------------------------------
                          And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the LORD your God. And all the congregation blessed the LORD God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the LORD, and the king. (1 Chronicles 29:20, KJV)

                          David did not have himself worshiped in equivalence to God in the same way Naboth was not accused of blaspheming "God and the king" in equivalence (1 Kings 21:13, KJV).
                          In both instances what was done unto God is in the absolute - not so concerning what was said to have been done unto people.

                          The same would apply here:
                          serve now the LORD your God, and his people Israel (2 Chronicles 35:3, KJV).
                          The word used in the LXX is a derivative of latreuw - the worship due unto God alone.
                          The final judgement is God's. There is nothing left of David's kingdom, and the temple and everything associated with it has ceased to exist. Same fate as Sodom, Gomorrah, Tyre etc

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            The final judgment is God's...and He has already told us in the passages I cited that David did do these good things.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                              The final judgment is God's...and He has already told us in the passages I cited that David did do these good things.
                              Is so, why was David punished and his kingly line via Solomon extinguished?

                              I'm sure David occasionally did something beneficial to someone other than himself (most dictators do), but the reality is he messed up more readily than most people eg: the census that brought down the entire wrath of YHWH upon David's subjects.

                              As we agree: The final judgment is God's...and YHWH's ultimate judgement upon David and his people is self evident...

                              In anycase: A discussion on David and his failures and/or successes has no relevance to reconciling Ex 16-18 & Num 11. So if you want to discuss David and his failures and/or successes start a new thread...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I already cited the link for the discussion and you never addressed it when I did but then you continue to repeat the same false assertion.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X