When I started this blog, I wanted it to make a difference. I didn't want it to be a place where we could sit in ivory towers and contemplate things with little spiritual impact on the world. I hoped that it would be a place Christians could be sharpened and hopefully even people reached in some way.
So here it goes...I am offering a challenge to you. I challenge you to post on your blog a committment that you will not post again until you have had a Bible study with a lost person. Ask your readers to pray for that effort. If you want, make your very next post after the study about how it went and any further prayer needs for that individual. I know that is kind of a personal thing and feel free just to pass it up. Or you could let blogging actually change the way you live and not just the way you think.
I am making a committment to not post again until I have sat down with a lost person and had a Bible study. This is not an effort to gain attention for myself but a way to motivate myself to study with some of the people I have been meaning to study with for the past couple of weeks.
Please pray for it to make a difference in the kingdom. God bless.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Thanks Matt. We all need to be reminded that we are disciples and Jesus has called us to make other disciples.
I have come to the conclusion that if I'm not doing something each day to contribute to the disciple making process, I've somehow gotten off track. For me this means building relationships with people. As those relationships are built, opportunities for service open up, and then God begins to do his best work through us in the lives of people.
I will pray for your open door to those others you need to touch.
Peace.
Monday, February 19, 2007
When a preacher says, "Well, I do not know"...
but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts. Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence, keeping your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who defame your good conduct in Christ may themselves be put to shame, 1 Peter 3:15-16
Look in the book of the LORD and read: No one of these shall be lacking, For the mouth of the LORD has ordered it, and his spirit shall gather them there, Isaiah 34:16.
This is a conversation resulted from commenting from a sermon given by Milton S., a preacher entitled, "Holding Firmly to the Traditions." I have taken noticed on his lack of knowledge of how women should cover their head. He mentioned that it is a hat, and is ought to be wore during assembly. If only Milton understood from the start that the veil is the woman's long uncut hair, then he has been saved from debating or arguing on when and where to wear the head cover. Since there is a comment area after his sermon, thus I commented with an invitation to check our ADD website. And this is how the conversation went:
16 Comments -
Show Original Post
Collapse comments
Andrew C. said...
Is there any evidence from scripture that the interpretation of this passage depends on the 1st century culture in Corinth? I think not. It's a lie that has been bandied about to undermine the clear teaching of the apostle Paul.Why don't we just do what it says and not argue about it?
9:06 PM
Milton S. said...
Mostly because we like to sin.Also, we always do have to consider context, whether we think much about it or not. Context, for example, prevents us from literally cutting off our hands or gouging out our eyes in following the "clear teaching" of Mt. 5:29-30. The problem is that we're most tempted to over-contextualize a passage when the apparent meaning runs counter to the way we like to do things. When I said I don't know whether women ought to cover their heads in the church today, I mean that I really don't know. Even with all the contextualizing I've done in this sermon, it still looks to me like women ought to cover their heads in the assembly. But I seem to be pretty isolated in that belief. With so many people around me--many of them either more mature, more knowledgable or both--saying that women need not cover their heads--I'm hesitant to be dogmatic about it. More harm than good has been done, I think, by those who insist that everyone else follow their own theological conviction--churches split, fellowship damaged, souls lost. Some doctrines (e.g. the incarnation, the atonement, the resurrection) are worth any amount of conflict to preserve, whether or not anyone else around believes it. I'm not convinced that women covering their heads in church is one of them. What do you think?
7:09 AM
elman said...
You said that your practice on head coverings is a good example...and then you said that: "Now, all this theology still hasn’t answered a basic question raised by this text: should women wear hats in the worship assembly today?" And then you answered, "Well, I don’t know."Let me just introduce to you what Peter said about his co-apostle Paul:II Peter 3:15-17 And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability.
Now, Paul has some other writings about the covering which nature provides, not a hat, but rather is the original hair which women should leave uncut. This is also mentioned from 1 cor 11:5-6 and 1 cor 11:14-15. Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. Why should then women wear a hat or any other artificial head cover? Thus, biblically speaking, even nature teaches us that women need not use an artificial head covering but rather a long hair that nature provides for her. Let it grow, untouched by a scissor. Even black women can grow their hair given the time or if nature permits. So, if you cut it, then it's not long anymore, more so when you shave it. I see many churches fight a simple question, which should not be the question after all.
You should first ask, what covering is being considered for women as a symbol: For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. The covering or long uncut hair of a woman represents that her man is under Jesus Christ's authority. Therefore, a woman praying with a long uncut hair honours her head, which is the man that is under Jesus Christ's authority.Many preachers who calls themselves preachers doesn't even have a complete understanding of the old testament. More so, of Paul's writing.
12:52 PM
elman said...
Hi! In order to answer your other questions, I want you first to learn about the most sensible creature of this times, Bro Eliseo Soriano (known also as Brother Eli). He's a Filipino whom we consider as the one prophesied in Revelation 1:3, blessed is he that readeth. You can throw any questions to him about the bible, and he will read to you the answer found in the bible (not man-made stories) immediately. You can try to have a sample of the questions answered already through clips and online feed at www.truthcaster.com or www.theoldpath.tv
12:52 PM
elman said...
And he spoke a parable to them; Can the blind lead the blind? will they not both fall into the ditch? How can you hold on to the tradition when you have no idea which covering St Paul is talking about. You know brother, as I read your thoughts/writings, I see that you are almost at the right track but you curved to your own perception and ideas not from the bible. All things we say should have a basis, more so based on the bible. So, I hope you visit our website. All thanks be to God.
1:06 PM
Milton S. said...
Elman, I am truly glad you have read my writings and offer your comments. I have read what you have written here and continue to think about it seriously. I take issue, however, with a couple of your comments.In your first comment post, you take issue with my waffling on the issue here. That's fine. I'm not entirely comfortable with my position, and I welcome discussion and disagreement. Your final sentence, though, crosses the line from disagreeing with my position to insulting me. Please don't do that anymore at this site.Also, because you have actually read my post and seem to be sincere about your respect for Mr. Soriano, I am letting your second comment posting stand. Please do not, however, continue as you have done on several occasions to post on this site what amounts to advertisements for Mr. Soriano's ministry.Your third comment is also not very kind. Again, I welcome discussion and even disagreement on this site. But please, let's be kind to one another.
6:53 PM
Milton S. said...
By the way, Elman, I'm sorry to read you were stung by a scorpion but glad to see that you seem to be recovering well.
7:01 PM
elman said...
1 tim 1:3-4, 6-7 2 I repeat the request I made of you when I was on my way to Macedonia, that you stay in Ephesus to instruct certain people not to teach false doctrines or to concern themselves with myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the plan of God that is to be received by faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, wanting to be teachers of the law, but without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance.
Oh, my comment is not to insult you but to show how frank the bible is and its warning to those who wants to be teachers of the law and those who wants to be a member of the Church of God. It's not only you who reads your article anyways. Now, I thank God that He gave you the chance to hear the real word of God, should you have visited our website I mentioned before. How can I invite you without stating the website?
Titus 2:7-8 showing yourself as a model of good deeds in every respect, with integrity in your teaching, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be criticized, so that the opponent will be put to shame without anything bad to say about us. Again, everything we say should have a basis, biblically speaking. More so when we tackle St Paul's message from God.II Peter 3:15-17 And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability.A praise undeserved is a scandal in disguise.
11:30 PM
elman said...
It is up to you if you'll let my comment postings stand. the last line on my first statement is a generalization and if it hurts you, then, it's something for you to ponder about. And if you have unanswered questions in mind, you know what to do.
11:47 PM
Tom D said...
Concerning comments made by Elman, isn't it strange that we always think that the one we disagree with is the one who is "ignorant and unstable" rather than ourselves (his reference to II Peter 3:15-17)? It's harder to look into ourselves and truely discover who is the "weaker" or "stronger" brother while trying not to offend (Romans 14). If we look at another of Peter's teaching (reference Peter's first letter, found ironically in the same chapter number and verses I Peter 3:15-17) we can see his advise to frame our comments with gentleness and respect. Beyond this, he also says "in our hearts set aside Christ as Lord". Milton, you have obviously done this, and I commend you for not overstepping your level of understanding (and most of us on this matter) by supporting a position which each deligent student of the Lord must decide "in our hearts".
11:24 AM
Milton S. said...
Thank you, Tom D., for your kind words. They really hit the spot today! Peace.
2:16 PM
Comment deleted
Comment deleted
elman said...
By the way, I placed this comment area as a link from my blogspot. I hope it's okay with you.
4:03 AM
2 Comments deleted (same as above, I edited some statements that seems unclear)
ELMAN said...
s it not this the premise:
Should women wear veils or hats or head covers in the worship assembly today? How about before and after, the assembly, do they need to wear it too? Do you pray outside the assembly? Do you pray anywhere, anytime? And what should they wear as a head cover?
Because Milton said:
"Now, all this theology still hasn’t answered a basic question raised by this text: should women wear hats in the worship assembly today?" "Well, I don’t know." ...Even with all the contextualizing I've done in this sermon, it still looks to me like women ought to cover their heads in the assembly. But I seem to be pretty isolated in that belief. With so many people around me--many of them either more mature, more knowledgable or both--saying that women need not cover their heads--I'm hesitant to be dogmatic about it. More harm than good has been done, I think, by those who insist that everyone else follow their own theological conviction--churches split, fellowship damaged, souls lost. Some doctrines (e.g. the incarnation, the atonement, the resurrection) are worth any amount of conflict to preserve, whether or not anyone else around believes it. I'm not convinced that women covering their heads in church is one of them.
Thus, I answered: that women should have a long uncut hair as a head cover based on the bible, "not based on my own understanding." Then I mentioned a verse in the bible forewarning those who uses the writing of Paul. And also what Paul reminded Titus, showing yourself as a model of good deeds in every respect, with integrity in your teaching, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be criticized, so that the opponent will be put to shame without anything bad to say about us, Titus 2:7-8.
Therefore, since the doctrine can not be criticized, Milton replied:
In your first comment post, you take issue with my waffling on the issue here. That's fine. I'm not entirely comfortable with my position, and I welcome discussion and disagreement. Your final sentence, though, crosses the line from disagreeing with my position to insulting me. Please don't do that anymore at this site.
And tom d said:
we can see his advise to frame our comments with gentleness and respect. Beyond this, he also says "in our hearts set aside Christ as Lord". Milton, you have obviously done this, and I commend you for not overstepping your level of understanding (and most of us on this matter) by supporting a position which each deligent student of the Lord must decide "in our hearts".
Now I said:
tom, I got no issue on the verse in Romans, as it is not the topic. Should you want to use it, we can discuss it after we finish the first subject. May I just say that understanding with the help of God and knowing because of pre-conceived ideas or own perception are two different things my brother. Moreso, when you do not know the answer at all! Yes, 2 Peter 3:17 states, Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. A student of the bible should know this too. How come you do not want to offend the wicked? Of course not the person of Milton, but what is contained in the sermon.
And I am truly disappointed to hear from a preacher, who does a sermon, this line: "Even with all the contextualizing I've done in this sermon, it still looks to me like women ought to cover their heads in the assembly." Imagine, Milton took the head cover as a hat! Let met say, "what an eccentric and, goofy interpretation! Let me just also point out based on the bible that it is the Scripture that keeps tradition from straying too far from the truth, not the other way around. From this perspective, the Apostle Paul begins this section of instruction with a reminder of the importance of Christian tradition.
Milton assumed too that because we have limited resources or information in history regarding the covering or other traditions, he concluded that atleast some of these issues are cultural, and we don't fully understand them today. Let us go back to what he said, "The question facing Christians today in this passage is simple to ask but much more difficult to answer: are Paul’s instructions here primarily cultural, so that they would not apply to Christians today? Or is he speaking of eternal principles for Christian worship, so that we must obey the letter of his instruction? We can look to the history of the first century Roman empire to help us find answers. In Paul’s day, for example, it was considered scandalous for a woman to appear publicly without a head covering; to do so made her look like a prostitute [2]. But what about in a private home? Was a Christian woman allowed to appear bare-headed when the church met in the houses of members to pray and worship? In the first century, Roman men wore head coverings while praying, but Greeks worshiped bare-headed [3]. Although in later centuries Jewish men came to cover their heads in prayer, during the first century it seems they did not [4]. All of these historical details help us better to understand what Paul was referring to in the first century, but history will take us only so far in deciding how best to interpret this passage for today.
What kind of logic is that when the explanation of Paul is found also within the chapter mentioned. Milton did not even state 1 cor 11:13-16. The head cover for man and woman is simply their hair. He look the history like others did and he too did not see the answer. So, what will be the result? Milton answered it himself but misstate that "we won’t be able to answer certain questions strictly by looking at history and the New Testament." May I correct you, the new testament has the answer my friend you just need to seek!
Milton added "Knowing precisely how Paul’s words apply to us today hinges on understanding complex cultural practices that we simply don’t have adequate information to understand today. What, for example, do the angels in v. 10 have to do with head coverings? Is Paul speaking in this passage strictly of the assembly or also of Christian womens’ appearance in public? Given Paul’s instructions in 1 Cor. 14 about women keeping silent in the worship assemblies, why does he mention them praying and prophesying here? At least some of these issues are cultural, and we don’t fully understand them today."
Paul stated it in the book because God told him to write it for the Christians to follow. It is not just a tradition made up by the first Christians or by Paul! Have not you noticed base on what you said and I wit, " For the church, traditions are dangerous matters. Once a belief or practice has been handed down for a few generations, the tradition has a way of taking on a life of its own. Once a particular practice has been in place for as long as anyone in the church can remember, we are inclined to feel it was handed down not only by men, but by God. The church today, for example, is struggling with innovations introduced not by God, but by Christians seventy-five or a hundred years ago. Our practice on head coverings is a good example. As much as we claim to follow only the Bible without the introduction of human tradition, if we’ve always been taught a particular doctrine or practice, we almost never give it up, even if it’s wrong. Once a teaching, however wrong, becomes a tradition in the church, it’s terribly difficult to get rid of it. So traditions can be very dangerous matters." And then you said that woman ought to wear a hat in church assembly! Look now who's talking!
With regards to 1 cor 11:10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. This is a good topic. Let me read you this verse: Look in the book of the LORD and read: No one of these shall be lacking, For the mouth of the LORD has ordered it, and his spirit shall gather them there, Isaiah 34:16 and Rev 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. That is why I invited you to listen to Brother Eli to answer your other questions.
Yes, Milton, the underlying themes of the Apostle’s message are clear enough: traditions are important for the church. So, we are obliged to follow it! It could have been more clearer to everyone should you know what head cover is mentioned in the New Testament. But now, thank God, you know.
Furthermore, If you will insist that it is a hat which women ought to wear a head cover during assembly, let me ask, do they need to wear it everytime they pray, Or everywhere they go? Remember, christians pray most of the time. But how about those who cannot afford to buy a head cover? Are you saying that they keep silent instead and pray no more?
But instead of figuring out what is right and true from the bible, he and his reader divert the answer to question of gentleness and respect of how I delivered my comment. Would my disappointment and verses I just got from the bible made you feel insulted? Then, is it me who made you feel such, or the verse? Should Milton has the respect for you that he has no answer for this question and admitted that he really does not know the answer. What kind of a preacher is He then? But this comment area is not to ridicule the person of Milton, this is just to say that there is an answer found in the bible, you just need to seek. And if you can find it, ask someone's help, pray. The kingdom of God is in the Church, so you need to ask where the kingdom is. Therefore, try our church.
Of course our subject of discussion is the women's head cover. Why should women cover their head then? Is it not important?
One of the many subjects of discussions in a christian community is whether a woman should wear head cover or not. Another one is the head cover itself. Let me just refresh you of what Paul wrote concerning these tradition and doctrine.
1 cor 11:2-15(ESV) said that, 2Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. 3But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife[a] is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, 5but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is the same as if her head were shaven. 6For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. 7For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. 8For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.[b] 11Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; 12for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. 13Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, 15but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
Let me highlight the concern, 1 Cor 11:13-16(KJV) states that, 13Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? 14Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 16But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
Why then should women wear a hat or any other artificial head cover? Thus, biblically speaking, even nature teaches us that women need not use an artificial head covering but rather should maintain a long hair that nature provides for her. Let it grow, untouched by a scissor. Even black women can grow their hair given the time or if nature permits. So, if you cut it, then it's not long anymore, more so when you shave it. I see many churches fight a simple question of to wear or not to wear a hat. Is is a hat? You should first ask, what covering is being considered for women as a symbol. Also, why is it important? The covering or long uncut hair of a woman represents that her man is under Jesus Christ's authority. Therefore, a woman praying with a long uncut hair honours her head, which is the man that is under Jesus Christ's authority. 1Cor 11:1-4 states, 1Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. 2Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. 3But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
Therefore, based on the bible, women honor God, above all, if she let her hair grow naturally and never cut it. And what should we look for as a sign of authority on a woman's head? The covering or long uncut hair of a woman represents that her man is under Jesus Christ's authority and she is in the church mentioned by Paul. Therefore, a woman praying with a long uncut hair honours her head, which is the man that is under Jesus Christ's authority. Should a woman has no sign of God's authority, then whose authority is she under? Now, if you want to be subjected to God's authority, what shall you do? Should women wear artificial head cover? How can a woman pray if she does not have or hold a head cover? Can every woman buy a head cover? Many women in africa does not even got a food to eat.
These are questions that might have been raised by so many who professed that they are female christians, but did their minister, preacher, or anyone in their church answered this with wisdom, authority, conviction, fear and trust in God? If not, then now is the time to ponder if you are in the right church.
Also, Milton used the verse which is supposed to be for the commemoration of the Lord's supper: 1 cor 11:17 (ESV) Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. 1 cor 11:16-21 (KJV) said, If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God. 17Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. 18For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. 19For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. 20When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. 21For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. Milton's statements imply that if a practice would not result for the better, he is hesitant to be dogmatic about it. Paul says that he does not allow divisions and heresies in the church and pointed out what to do about it. That shows how to be kind to your fellow christians.
This would need another posting but anyways let me also, ask another subject, should a man cover his head or grows his hair and maintain a long hair like unto a woman? These questions are clearly explained to us in our Church. For those of you who are interested and found in their hearts God's calling, please, you know what to do.
Therefore, am I disrespectful if I said that a blind who leads a blind will both fall into the ditch? Did they fall already? Is the bible correct by saying, that the falling will happen should the blind leads a blind? Do you still have time to ponder and read more and pray that God will lead you to the old paths where the righteous walks and guided by the spirit.
Jeremiah 6;16: Thus says the LORD: Stand beside the earliest roads, ask the pathways of old Which is the way to good, and walk it; thus you will find rest for your souls. But they said, "We will not walk it."
And I want to add this: And those who wanting to be teachers of the law, but without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance, 1Tim 1:7. I am not adding insult to injury but rather stating that the bible is frank to its readers. Well, discussion is very much welcome in your blogspot as you said and I thank God for this chance and opportunity to spread His True words. For those who has questions which can not be answered by Milton, well, I guess he will not deprive you when you seek out from the book of the Lord.even from instructions from my comments which remain posted up to now. If you have the chance to read it, I welcome you. Thanks Milton for posting this. You know what, I am also a student of the Word of God, and I would have not commented here should I haven't taken noticed of similarities of the way we understand Paul's writings. It is just that I took the initiative to answer what you lack based on the bible. And those things I know, I learned from our Presiding Minister in the Church.
Finally, as a person who gives sermon to a group of people, it is not enough to say that, I do not know. People look up to you for guidance. So let me end this comment with some verses from the Bible: But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: 1 Peter 3:15. A preacher, a teacher, a reader, or whoever guides a student of the bible should always be ready to give an answer to every man that asks a reason of the hope that is in you. Look in the book of the LORD and read: No one of these shall be lacking, For the mouth of the LORD has ordered it, and his spirit shall gather them there, Isaiah 34:16. Lastly, 2 Peter 3:15-17 (KJV) 15And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. Best of all, do we need a preacher, or a reader? A preacher for me says of what he thinks is best, from his point of view and pre-conceived ideas and will usually say I do not know, or point finger to something to explain the reason why he does not understand. But a reader, Rev 1:3 says, 3Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
My friend, the holy kiss is not a kiss in the lips or the cheeks or any physical kiss. It's not because I think it is not but based on the bible. Ask Soriano, and the bible will answer!
1:12 PM (2:10am Philippine time 17Feb2007)
Should I be wrong on what I said, I ask for forgiveness and may I refer you to our website where there are clips about the doctrine of head cover found in the bible as discussed by our Presiding Minister, Brother Eliseo Soriano.
Collapse comments
re elman's post
husker said...
as i wandering on my email i found this link.. these is a very intersting and wonderful discussion... as i read all through out the passages i found elman words very honest and very definite answers taken from the holy scriptures... i am very satisfied to your answers...
February 23, 2007 9:48 PM
elman said...
I regret to say that husker's link is at a dead end. I hope he can give his affiliation the next time he visits this site.
February 25, 2007 2:21 P
Post a Comment