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!

KJV denies the doctrine of hell

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Pastor Larry, Sep 10, 2003.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 3
  1. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 Timothy 5:1 (KJV1769):
    Rebuke not an elder, but intreat
    him as a father    ; and the younger
    men as brethren;

    That is no way to be taking to your father :(
     
    #21 Ed Edwards, Sep 26, 2003
  2. The Harvest

    The Harvest New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mt 23:9
    And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

    [Snipped] is not my father.

    [ September 26, 2003, 06:23 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]
     
    #22 The Harvest, Sep 26, 2003
  3. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0


    Let's see, He was swallowed whole by a big fish, taken down into water where fish live and men drown, waters compassed him about, even to the SOUL, he went down to the bottoms of the mountains (Where fish don't swim); the earth (not the sea) with her bars was about him FOR EVER:, God brought . . . up [his] LIFE from corruption, and he was there long enough to be partially digested when he was vomited out on the shore. Also he says he was In Hell. (Sheol is translated as "Hell" or "the grave" (both places where dead people are) but never as a whale's stomach.) If you heard this story from an average joe, you might question his sainity but how could you question (given you knew his story was true) that he died.
     
    #23 Lacy Evans, Sep 26, 2003
  4. Taufgesinnter

    Taufgesinnter New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,135
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why do you say "we don't know..."? Don't include everyone in that ridiculous statement. Those of us who have a Bible and read it know the nature of hell's fire. And those of us who have a Bible and read it also know the nature of the place prepared by God for the devil and his angels. You can't even get the quote right.

    Jim you need to stop wasting so much time on this BB and find yourself a Bible and study that thing man.     </font>[/QUOTE]That was grossly unfair unless you'd like to make the same accusation against some of the gospel writers. It's false reasoning to assume that a partial quote is a misquote.
     
    #24 Taufgesinnter, Sep 26, 2003
  5. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
     
    #25 Lacy Evans, Sep 26, 2003
  6. Trotter

    Trotter <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The OT uses of "hell" are the word "sheol", the place of the dead, grave. Hell was not fully revealed in the OT.

    In Christ,
    Trotter
     
    #26 Trotter, Sep 26, 2003
  7. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because I read the text and took it literally. It does not say that he died. The belly of a whale is not hell, at least not in any of the Bibles that I have and I do have several. The text must determine our theology. But you are off point. My point is that the tactics you and others like you use against modern versions are deadly against the KJV because they show the same kind of "errors." This is true whether you like it or not.
     
    #27 Pastor Larry, Sep 27, 2003
  8. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
     
    #28 Lacy Evans, Sep 27, 2003
  9. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    First, I said "you and others like you" referring to a group of people who use illegitimate means to defend their position. I reject that. I was referring to the general techniques used by your side of this debate and included you in the other side of the debate.

    However, since you asked, one example is your arguments on the restoration of God's word being analagous to creation is ludicrous. It is the worst kind of attempt at "studying" God's word. The two bear no relation to the KJV. That is the type of tactic that has no place in this debate. You attempt to count revivals between 1611 and 1881 as proof of the KJV. But you must realize that more people have been saved in church history without the KJV than with it. Therefore your proof falls, using your own techniques. Even in modern eras, more people are saved apart from the KJV than with it. That refutes your argument using your argument as the basis.

    Your eighth graders are wrong. I don't have you messed up.

    You have attacked God's word because you don't like the translation it is found in. Don't tell me you have stood for God's word. You have attacked it in modern versions. I reject that way of thinking.

    I didn't say sheol was the belly of the fish. The fish was the gracious act of deliverance by God. Sheol is where he cried from for deliverance.

    Perhaps three days according to the story. But I don't know that Jonah held his breath. The God who created the world has no problem getting air into the stomach of the fish. I believe in miracles. This is a question of miracles, not of evidence.

    The bottom line is that Jonah was not in hell when this story took place.
     
    #29 Pastor Larry, Sep 27, 2003
  10. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you want to speak generally, then do so. it is not my fault if I misunderstand your plain speech. (I have a tendency to read things that way.) What you said was ". .the tactics
    (posting out of context verses like you did in Jonah) you and others like you use against modern versions are deadly against the KJV because they show the same kind of 'errors.'"
    You got me messed up. I never do that.
    I'll have to ask yo to clarify before I can respond. This makes no sense. Did you mean "analagous to resurrection?" Whichever is has nothing to do with the "tactics" you accused me of.

    And this is relevant to me supposedly posting verses to compare the AV with MVs how? Matt 7:15,16

    The only MV I am attacking at this moment is the PLV (Pastor Larry Version)This is true whether you like it or not.

    Was he or was he not in the belly of the fish? Is Sheol the fish's gut, the ocean or what according to your view? Sheol is in the heart of the earth! (see Ps 16:10, with Acts 2:27 and Matt 12:40) (Also Deut 32:22; Gen 37:35; Num 16:30,33; I Sam 2:6) Dead people go there. And there is fire there. Granted it's not the Lake of Fire but it ain't a whale belly or a submarine patch of seaweed neither.

    God pumping air to the bottoms of the mountains! Now that IS a miracle! I quit. resurrection has nothing on that one.

    Lacy
     
    #30 Lacy Evans, Sep 27, 2003
  11. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is my quote. You study my quote and your quote and then tell me why you changed my words to make it appear that I said something I did not say.

    If you doubt whether this is an honest quote, you can look above and figure it out. Now, tell me why you changed it.

    The point is that I was pointing out a tactic that KJVOs are fond of using and showed how it could be used against the KJV. I did the same thing--showed how a tactic you use to support the KJV can be used against the KJV--this from your own words, addressing your point about revival. You made the claim that the revivals between 1611 and 1881 prove that the KJV is superior. I simply pointed out that if we really compare revivals and numbers of people saved, the evidence points away from the KJV, not towards it. I used your argumentation tactic against your position and showed your tactic to be inadequate. That was my point in this whole thread--to show that the tactics used by teh KJVO crowd can used against them. It shows that they are illegitimate tactics.

    My point on this was the illegitimate Bible study techniques required to support this strange view. It is not sound. It is not biblical. It is an inappropriate use of Scripture. Having said that, the little bit I have read of it appear to actually work against your position, not for it.

    It is not relevant. But you brought it up. You asked me to reread your posts and show where you used tactics to defend your position that could actually be used to refute your position. I did that. Perhaps you confusion is due to the fact that you did not understand the premise of the thread. I will quote it for you from the third paragraph of the post dated Sept 10 at 12:20 pm. I said, Second, it shows that the method of the KJVOnlyists can be used against their own position. If you would like the full post to catch you up to speed, go read the whole post and place it in the context.

    I don't have a version. Sorry to disappoint you.

    Reading the text here would be helpful. Jonah is in Sheol. God spares him from sheol. How? By sending a great fish to swallow him. Sheol in this context refers to death. Jonah was headed down to death. Yet he was still conscious as is evident from the fact that he could describe it. From that sure and certain death (Sheol) God delivered him by the great fish. Sheol is not in the heart of the earth. That is a misunderstanding due to your not being fully informed. Sheol has a range of meaning in Scripture. Dig out your BDB and look it up. TWOT also has a good simple discussion of it. You will see how inadequate "belly of the earth" is as a definition of Sheol. Knowing the meaning of words is vital to understanding the text. You can't just go making stuff up.

    It is a great miracle. At least we agree on something.
     
    #31 Pastor Larry, Sep 27, 2003
  12. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is my quote. You study my quote and your quote and then tell me why you changed my words to make it appear that I said something I did not say..</font>[/QUOTE]

    Pastor Larry you are incorrigible. Right here in front of you is your quote and my exact copy of it (I cut and pasted it, for crying out loud, because I don't type that well.) with a parenthetical phrase explaining your position inserted for clarity. You accuse me of changing the quote and it is a word for word quote. If the paranthetical insertion bothered you then why did you go on to say:
    Is the KJVO tactic to which you refer (posting out of context verses like you did in Jonah), or not. That is how you started the thread so forgive me for assuming that. (I actually think your original premise is noteworthy and even a little funny, but you probably could have found a better verse)

    I didn't miss the point, you just are perhaps so eager to win an argument that you can't see anything else. I never do what you accuse ME and OTHERS LIKE ME of doing. I never post out of context MV verses and compare them to the KJV. It is not necessary for my position. It is wrong to falsly accuse me and you could be gracious and admit it. This is getting old. If you want to debate issues or doctrines then "have at thee", but this part of the conversation is starting to sound like two kids arguing, "nuh-uh!", "Uh-huh","nuh-uh!", "Uh-huh","nuh-uh!", "Uh-huh","nuh-uh!", "Uh-huh" (ad infinitum).

    Lacy
     
    #32 Lacy Evans, Sep 27, 2003
  13. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not incorrigible but I love the truth and I hate it when people distort it. I did not use a verse out of context. I did not accuse you of doing so (thought most KJVOs do). What I did was show an instance where a particular translation of a word that is different than other translations could be accused of being an error or perversion. That is a standard tactic of KJVOs. It had nothing to do with context. You should have been able to figure that out from the original post.

    Your quote of mine was not word for word. You added in a parenthesis to make it look like I said something I didn't. When you add words to someone else's sentence, you use brackets. That is standard and has been for many many years. Parenthesis means the author is including something. Brackets means that the one quoting the author is doing the adding. When you failed to properly punctuate the sentence, you made it appear that I said something I did not say. I am sorry if that was not your intent. The biggest problem was your "clarification" was wrong.

    No, posting verses out of context is not the tactic I was referring to. It is not how I started the thread. The original post was not about context; it was about the translation of Sheol. The original post was clear enough on that. My second post make it even more clear. The tactic under consideration was harping on a word and its particular translation. How many times have we seen someone attack a KJV for omitting "hell" simply because they translate the word differently? A great many.

    However, you are right that I probably could find a better verse if I cared to look. This was just one that jumped out at me.

    I already showed you where you did what I have said.

    I did not accuse you of this.

    I did not falsely accuse you. I showed you exactly what I was talking about ... twice. I showed twice where you used an illegitimate form of argumentation that can be used effectively against the KJV. That was the point of this thread, as demonstrated by my previous posts.

    Tio a large degree this whole topic is old. But as long as there are those who attack God's word, then some of us must come in here to defend it.

    It appears that you missed the point from the beginning. Let me clarify one more time.

    1. The point was not about using verses out of context, though that is a frequent problem with KJVOs. I do not know if you have used them out of context or not because I haven't read much of what you post. If you say you don't, then I will accept your word unless it is proved otherwise. Howevewr, since that was not the accusation, it is irrelevant.

    2. The point was, "Tactics used by the KJVOs in support of the KJV can be used against the KJV." I used an example of a tactic by focusing on a particular word that was translated in a particular way. For an example of how a KJVO does the same thing, read the thread "Blasphemous error in the NIV." There is a prime case of the very phenomenon that I am talking about. Someone harps on the translation of a word and calls it an error, when it is in fact a proper translation.

    Hopefully there is no more confusion about what this thread was about. It is amazing that it was this confusing.
     
    #33 Pastor Larry, Sep 27, 2003
  14. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know Pastor Larry, you are right! I have seen the light! I and others like me do use the tactic of ______________(I'll let you describe it this time because how ever I try to describe it could never stand up to your deft semantic and punctuational scrutiny) . I use the tactic of _______________ all the time! I can't believe I never saw it before! God bless you Pastor Larry for never giving up on me! How could I ever repent of ______________ if you had never pointed it out to me! You are such a man of God! If I PM you my mailing address do you think I might have an autograph or a bit of cloth that you have touched. I am free of the tactic of _____________________! Free I tell you! Free!

    And you know what else, the more I think about it, the more I believe that it was really me who started those threads which used the tactic of ______________.

    Let me get to my main point. More than anything else, I want to humbly and sincerely apologize to you for missing the point of your thread and being confused. How could I have been such an idiot? It was just so hard. I have such a problem with sarcasm you know! (Not enough Bugs Bunny growing up, probably.)

    By the way if you have any more verses that you have personally translated, may I have copies. (I would never trust myself with an original! I might be tempted toward bibliolatry with my past tendencies!) I cannot even imagine a more accurate translation existing! From now on I'm coming to you first before I try to understand any more verses.

    I don't know how else to say this Pastor Larry but you are the best friend I ever had!

    Love Lacy
     
    #34 Lacy Evans, Sep 28, 2003
  15. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I appreciate your apology. It took a big man to do that. I have had to do it a few times when I have acted in haste in posting and then later realized i messed up. Hopefully this will get this thread back on track.

    BTW, I have translated quite a bit but not for any public purposes. My purpose in translating is study related. It helps me to focus on what was actually said. It is strange how in reading English that we are familiar with, we often skip over words or ideas. (I think in this thread that is what happened. You assumed something without reading closely and ended up making a mistake.) In translating, you have to deal with every single word. I usually translate everything I preach on Sunday morning to get a feel for the passage. It helps to see that words that the biblical author used. It is a worthy investment of a little bit of time. Besides, it keeps me in the languages and I worked too hard at that to let it go easily.

    Most of the time my translation comes out very close to the NASB because of the NASB's wooden literalness. In preaching a passage, I often find my preaching similar to the NIV since it gives a more clear rendition of a confusing passage. It is not intentional by any means. I usually don't even look at the NIV until after I have preached, or until someone comes up and tells me what the NIV says. It is a wonderful thing to have in the congregation people who have a hunger for the word and who study it to know it better. You can't get by with sloppy exegesis.
     
    #35 Pastor Larry, Sep 28, 2003
  16. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    I knew I shoulda took a left turn at Alba-koiky.

    Lacy
     
    #36 Lacy Evans, Sep 28, 2003
  17. Steven m.

    Steven m. New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2003
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are You Washed in the Blood?

    Have you been to Jesus for the cleansing power?
    Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb?
    Are you fully trusting in His grace this hour?
    Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb?


    Not according to the new Bible [snip]Versions!

    Not according to the New International Version (NIV), New American Standard Version (NASV), New Living Bible, New Revised Standard Versions (NRSV), Revised Standard Version (RSV), The Living Bible (TLB), Today’s English Version, Contemporary English Version (CEV), International Standard Version: (ISV) and the other [snip]Versions!

    Revelation 1:5 clearly reads in the King James Bible:


    And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, (KJB)

    But you are NOT "washed in the blood" in the New [snip]Versions . . .

    American Standard Version (ASV) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood;
    Amplified Bible reads:

    and from Jesus Christ the faithful and trustworthy Witness, the First-born of the dead [first to be brought back to life] and the Prince (Ruler) of the kings of the earth. To Him Who ever loves us, and has once [for all] loosed and freed us from our sins by His own blood.
    Contemporary English Version (CEV) reads:

    May kindness and peace be yours from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness. Jesus was the first to conquer death, and he is the ruler of all earthly kings. Christ loves us, and by his blood he set us free from our sins.
    Good News for Modern Man reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn Son who was raised from death, who is also the ruler of the kings of the earth. He loves us, and by his death he has freed us from our sins
    International Standard Version (ISV) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, the witness, the faithful one, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To the one who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood;
    Living Bible (TLB) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ who faithfully reveals all truth to us. He was the first to rise from death, to die no more. He is far greater than any king in all the earth. All praise to him who always loves us and who set us free from our sins by pouring out his lifeblood for us.
    New American Standard Version (NASV) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood
    New Century Version (NCV) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, Jesus is the faithful witness, the first among those raised from the dead. He is the ruler of the kings of the earth. He is the One who loves us, who made us free from our sins with the blood of his death.
    New International Version (NIV) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood,
    New Living Bible reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness to these things, the first to rise from the dead, and the commander of all the rulers of the world. All praise to him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by shedding his blood for us.
    New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and freed us from our sins by his blood
    New Testament in Modern English (J.B. Phillips) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, firstborn of the dead, and ruler of kings upon earth. To him who loves us and has set us free from our sins through his own blood
    Revised Standard Version (RSV) reads:

    and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood
    Today’s English Version reads:

    and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first to be raised from death and who is also the ruler of the kings of the world. He loves us, and by his sacrificial death he has freed us from our sins
    The shocking FACT is – NOWHERE in the new [snip]Versions do they read "you are washed in the blood"!

    I repeat – NOWHERE do the new [snip] Versions read "you are washed in the blood"!

    What can wash away my sins?
    Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
    What can wash away my sins?
    Nothing . . . According to the new [snip] Versions

    Oh Happy day when Jesus washed my sins away! – Not according to the NIV, NASV, NCV, CEV, at al!


    According to the NIV, NASV, NCV, CEV and other [snip] Versions – Jesus Christ did not wash your sins away!

    Why don’t we "update" our "archaic", "hard to understand" song books?

    Have you been to Jesus for the loosing power?
    Are you freed in the blood of the Lamb?
    Are you fully trusting in His grace this hour?
    Are you loosed in the blood of the Lamb?
    What can loose away my sins?
    Nothing but the blood of Jesus

    Isn’t it irreverent and sacrilegious that these new [snip] Version people will "update" the words of God — without "batting an eye" — and yet would not dare even consider "messing with" the song "Are You Washed In the Blood"!

    Aren’t you glad Brother Elisha Hoffman, the author of "Are You Washed in the Blood", still read and believed the "updated" and "archaic" King James Bible? He might have come out with some silly occultic nonsense like Stephen Curtis Chapman’s "Lord of the Dance", or Carman’s blasphemous "Holy Ghost Hop", et al.

    Consider the following wonderful, Christ-uplifting hymns that are contrary to the NIV, NASV, NLB, NRSV, RSV ASV, NCV, CEV, and the other "legions" (Mark 5:9) of [snip] Versions!

    Jesus paid it all,
    All to Him I owe;
    Sin had left a crimson stain,
    He washed it white as snow.
    — Jesus Paid It All

    Just as I am, and waiting not
    To rid my soul of one dark blot,
    To Thee whose blood can cleanse each spot,
    O Lamb of God, I come, I come.
    — Just As I Am

    Happy day, happy day, when Jesus washed my sins away!
    He taught me how to watch and pray, and live rejoicing every day
    Happy day, happy day, when Jesus washed my sins away.
    — O Happy Day

    Lord Jesus, for this I most humbly entreat,
    I wait, blessed Lord, at Thy crucified feet.
    By faith, for my cleansing, I see Thy blood flow,
    Now wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
    — White Than Snow

    Blessèd assurance, Jesus is mine!
    O what a foretaste of glory divine!
    Heir of salvation, purchase of God,
    Born of His Spirit, washed in His blood.
    — Blessed Assurance

    There is a blood-washed multitude, a mighty army strong;
    The Lord of hosts their righteousness, redeeming love their song.
    — The Blood Washed Throng

    There is a fountain filled with blood drawn from Emmanuel’s veins;. . .
    The dying thief rejoiced to see that fountain in his day;
    And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away.
    Washed all my sins away, washed all my sins away;
    And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away.
    — There Is A Fountain Filled With Blood

    I don’t know about you — but thank God (and no thanks to the new [snip] Versions) — "I’m Washed in the Blood of the Lamb"!

    And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, (KJB)

    Thank you Jesus for Your word.

    [ October 02, 2003, 11:46 PM: Message edited by: Pastor_Bob ]
     
    #37 Steven m., Oct 2, 2003
  18. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Steven m.: "Revelation 1:5 clearly reads in the King James Bible:

    And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness,
    and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince
    of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and
    washed us from our sins in his own blood, (KJB)"

    When you quote the KJB,
    you must tell me which of the following
    you refer to:

    1. KJV1611
    2. KJV1769
    3. KJV1873

    Thank you. Please don't make it hard for me to
    be a good Borean, i do like to check such matters
    in the three different KJVs on my computer desk.

    [​IMG]
     
    #38 Ed Edwards, Oct 2, 2003
  19. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    Steven m. I appreciate your ideas. Just be careful with the "per-version" thing. It's against the rules of this board, and it;'s bad form.

    "MVs" is the accepted term here for the perverted, satanic, corrupted, trash-digger-found, excuses for bibles that these Bible-correcting heretics read. (Just kidding guys!) (I owed you that Dr Bob!)

    Love Lacy [​IMG]


    Brother Ed,
    There...you...go...again. (Ronald Reagan)
     
    #39 Lacy Evans, Oct 2, 2003
  20. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    My Doctor said i was to get
    more exercise.

    I done my exercise for today: Jumping
    to Conclusions [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    #40 Ed Edwards, Oct 2, 2003
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 3
Loading...