Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: Original Sin

  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    29
    Post Thanks / Like

    Original Sin

    I cannot understand this aspect of christianity and I would like to hear a christian's views on it (and, of course, debate it).

    edit (thanks, Aspoestertjie):
    sorry, i'm new here, i guess i should clarify:

    i understand what original sin is, but i don't see how it is right, fair, or moral.

    in what way is a baby sinful?
    if we are judged by the sins of our ancestors, are you judged by what your grandmother did?
    is the "original sin" really a sin?

    i understand the facts behind original sin, but not the morals
    Last edited by bobloblaw; April 25th, 2009 at 03:17 PM.

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Venus
    Posts
    3,908
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Unfortunately you will need to make a claim/statement of sorts in your Opening Post, so that people can at least have some idea what you want from them.

    Personally I don't know what to think of the Original Sin. Some Christians obviously believe it is true.
    >>]Aspoestertjie[<<

    ODN Rules

    Join our Facebook Page here!

  3. #3
    tbstutz
    Guest

    Re: Original Sin

    The original sin refers to the sinful state and condition in which humans are born.

  4. #4
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    486
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Original sin, while it is a sin, is primarily a sign of the impurity that we are born into

    if we are judged by the sins of our ancestors, are you judged by what your grandmother did?
    Original sin is based on when Eve took the apple from the tree of knowledge. Parents, ancestors, etc. have nothing to do with original sin.


    As I'm sure the death of babies will become a hot topic..

    "The idea of limbo, which the church has used for many centuries to designate the destiny of infants who die without baptism, has no clear foundation in revelation even though it has long been used in traditional theological teaching. Moreover, the notion that infants who die without baptism are deprived of the beatific vision, which has for so long been regarded as the common doctrine of the church, gives rise to numerous pastoral problems, so much so that many pastors of souls have asked for a deeper reflection on the ways of salvation"
    http://www.catholicculture.org/cultu...TOKEN=55983039

    Essentially, we say babies go to a neutral site "limbo". This isn't really something we were told by God, but it is the most logical explanation.

  5. #5
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    According to Christians, just south of heaven
    Posts
    1,723
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    My favorite thing about original sin is that the "church" says we are born into it.....yet "god" and "jesus" say children are innocent.

    Contradiction in terms? I think so!

    Luke 18:15-17, People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. But Jesus called the children to him and said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."

    In Heaven there is no beer. That's why we drink it here.

    Rogue Cardinal, Member of the God-Awful Atheist Syndicate


  6. #6
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    29
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by cdubs View Post
    Original sin is based on when Eve took the apple from the tree of knowledge. Parents, ancestors, etc. have nothing to do with original sin.
    how does eve taking the apple from the tree of knowledge relate to us today if ancestors have nothing to do with original sin?


    Essentially, we say babies go to a neutral site "limbo". This isn't really something we were told by God, but it is the most logical explanation.
    if we are making conclusions based on logic, then wouldn't you say that someone who has lived a pure and sin free life should not go to hell, even if they are unbaptized, and therefore original sin is meaningless?

  7. #7
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by bobloblaw View Post
    I cannot understand this aspect of christianity and I would like to hear a christian's views on it (and, of course, debate it).

    edit (thanks, Aspoestertjie):
    sorry, i'm new here, i guess i should clarify:

    i understand what original sin is, but i don't see how it is right, fair, or moral.

    in what way is a baby sinful?
    if we are judged by the sins of our ancestors, are you judged by what your grandmother did?
    is the "original sin" really a sin?

    i understand the facts behind original sin, but not the morals
    I am presuming you are referring to the Roman Catholic idea that we are all born "with the stain of original sin" as if we ourselves are guilty of committing it.

    This is accepted only in Roman Catholicism and is in fact a rather new idea ( in the last 1,000 years or so).

    The Orthodox Christian -- and original Christian -- view of original sin is:

    Adam and Eve committed the original sin, and by this sin death, sickness and evil entered into the world.

    Although we are not guilty of it -- we suffer the consequences of it.

    Not unlike the child of a convicted murderer suffering consequences for his parent's sin -- even though the child bares no guilt personally for the crime of the parent.

    Hope this helps ... and welcome
    "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born" -- Ronald Reagan

    How can a moral wrong be a Civil Right?

  8. #8
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by bobloblaw View Post
    if we are making conclusions based on logic, then wouldn't you say that someone who has lived a pure and sin free life should not go to hell, even if they are unbaptized, and therefore original sin is meaningless?
    As Christians, one should not be so arrogant as to say who will be accepted into the Kingdom. That is for God and God alone.
    "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born" -- Ronald Reagan

    How can a moral wrong be a Civil Right?

  9. #9
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    29
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    As Christians, one should not be so arrogant as to say who will be accepted into the Kingdom. That is for God and God alone.
    As a human being, who God has given free will and independent thought, isn't it your responsibility to use your intelligence to come to your own conclusions about justice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    Although we are not guilty of it -- we suffer the consequences of it.

    Not unlike the child of a convicted murderer suffering consequences for his parent's sin -- even though the child bares no guilt personally for the crime of the parent.
    Does this seem fair to you?


    Shouldn't you warp your beliefs to fit what you think is logical instead of warping your logic to fit what you are told to believe?


    If you believe:
    a) that a person who has lived without sin does not deserve an eternity in hell
    b) that God is just and fair

    then you must conclude:
    a person who is sin free will go to heaven, regardless of their religion or if they were baptized
    Last edited by bobloblaw; April 26th, 2009 at 08:26 AM.

  10. #10
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    The only way to really make sense of Christianity is to look at it for what it really is: a big corporation.

    Like any corporation, they're selling something. In this case, they're sort of like a drug company in that they're selling a sort of "cure". What does every drug company secretly pray for at night? That the whole world will get sick with an illness and that the company will gain influence and wealth by producing the cure. Christianity is no different except that their cure doesn't really work because you were never really sick in the first place. Regardless, Christians for millenia have tried to convince you that you are, in fact, sick with a disease called sin. Even though this disease is supposed to come as a result of your actions and personal choices, Christians weren't content with the idea that some people could be outside their marketing campaign. So, they came up with the idea that you were born sick.

  11. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by bobloblaw View Post
    As a human being, who God has given free will and independent thought, isn't it your responsibility to use your intelligence to come to your own conclusions about justice?
    justice yes -- but not the mind of God. Original Sin was not eating an apple -- it was having the pride to think one can know God's mind -- to not need God. Read geneisis and you will see that.


    Does this seem fair to you?


    Shouldn't you warp your beliefs to fit what you think is logical instead of warping your logic to fit what you are told to believe?


    If you believe:
    a) that a person who has lived without sin does not deserve an eternity in hell
    b) that God is just and fair

    then you must conclude:
    a person who is sin free will go to heaven, regardless of their religion or if they were baptized
    No one lives without sin. We are all sinners. We all "miss the mark" in some way.

    As for who judges men's souls that is for God and God alone. As humans we can judge the actions of others -- but can not judge their souls.

    Want a mind twister?

    In the Old Testament, and one can argue in the New Testament as well, God uses people who commit bad acts to either punish His people when they do wrong, or fulfill prophecy. Do these people whose acts God used -- do you think God will judge them as being guilty of the acts God Himself used?

    Again -- one can not presume to know how God judges men's, and women's souls.
    "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born" -- Ronald Reagan

    How can a moral wrong be a Civil Right?

  12. #12
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric View Post
    The only way to really make sense of Christianity is to look at it for what it really is: a big corporation.

    Like any corporation, they're selling something. In this case, they're sort of like a drug company in that they're selling a sort of "cure". What does every drug company secretly pray for at night? That the whole world will get sick with an illness and that the company will gain influence and wealth by producing the cure. Christianity is no different except that their cure doesn't really work because you were never really sick in the first place. Regardless, Christians for millenia have tried to convince you that you are, in fact, sick with a disease called sin. Even though this disease is supposed to come as a result of your actions and personal choices, Christians weren't content with the idea that some people could be outside their marketing campaign. So, they came up with the idea that you were born sick.
    So you believe -- and that is why you go absolutely ballistic when I mention that belief in a Hell is not mandatory in the oldest Christian faith -- The Orthodox Church.
    "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born" -- Ronald Reagan

    How can a moral wrong be a Civil Right?

  13. #13
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    29
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    As for who judges men's souls that is for God and God alone. As humans we can judge the actions of others -- but can not judge their souls.
    Are we not defined by our actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    No one lives without sin. We are all sinners. We all "miss the mark" in some way.
    But, theoretically, a person could be without sin or, at least, their good deeds could be enough to cancel out any sin that they do commit. What you are saying is: all humans "miss the mark", and this is inevitable. If a person, lets call him Joe, lives a perfect life full of good deeds, except for inevitably "missing the mark", would he go to heaven? It is clearly not Joe's fault that he is not perfect because he is a human, and humans are not perfect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    but not [to make conclusions about] the mind of God. Original Sin was not eating an apple -- it was having the pride to think one can know God's mind -- to not need God. Read geneisis and you will see that.
    Clearly we both have the pride to say we know what God thinks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    Again -- one can not presume to know how God judges men's, and women's souls.
    exactly, you cannot say that you know how God thinks and how God judges people.

    The closest that we can get is to assume that God would not send "Joe" to Hell based on the nature of human beings in general, because God would do what is fair and just. You might say that we don't know what is fair and just; that is true, and therefore, we cannot know how God would judge Joe. However, if we were to guess we would have to use what we know about justice to conclude:
    Quote Originally Posted by bobloblaw View Post
    a person who is sin free will go to heaven, regardless of their religion or if they were baptized

  14. #14
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by bobloblaw View Post
    But, theoretically, a person could be without sin or, at least, their good deeds could be enough to cancel out any sin that they do commit. What you are saying is: all humans "miss the mark", and this is inevitable. If a person, lets call him Joe, lives a perfect life full of good deeds, except for inevitably "missing the mark", would he go to heaven? It is clearly not Joe's fault that he is not perfect because he is a human, and humans are not perfect.
    In Christianity -- it is not the actions but rather the intent that matters. EG: if a hermit lives in the woods all alone doing no harm to anyone but constantly fantasizes about murdering and raping humans -- well, whether or not that person is deserving of the Kingdom is up to God. Onlyu God knows what is men's hearts.

    Clearly we both have the pride to say we know what God thinks.
    Sure hope I never gave that impression, and I challenge to find a post where I stated I know God's mind or how He judges.

    exactly, you cannot say that you know how God thinks and how God judges people.
    Yep, that is what I have always stated -- to the best of my recollection anyway.

    The closest that we can get is to assume that God would not send "Joe" to Hell based on the nature of human beings in general, because God would do what is fair and just. You might say that we don't know what is fair and just; that is true, and therefore, we cannot know how God would judge Joe. However, if we were to guess we would have to use what we know about justice to conclude:
    Well you are assuming God sends people to Hell now. And that statement is not sarcasm. "Hell" as defined by the Western tradition does not exist in Judaism and did not exist in early Christianity. In fact the translation of words "gahenna", "sheol" and "Hades" in the original texts of the New Testament are only rather clumsily translated as "Hell" into English. But Gahenna, Sheol and Hades are not Hell.
    "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born" -- Ronald Reagan

    How can a moral wrong be a Civil Right?

  15. #15
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    29
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    In Christianity -- it is not the actions but rather the intent that matters. EG: if a hermit lives in the woods all alone doing no harm to anyone but constantly fantasizes about murdering and raping humans -- well, whether or not that person is deserving of the Kingdom is up to God.
    okay, lets say that "Joe" lives a life full of good deeds to others and without any harmful intentions or thoughts. Would baptism really affect his chances of getting in to heaven?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    Sure hope I never gave that impression, and I challenge to find a post where I stated I know God's mind or how He judges.
    alright... You never said that you know how God judges, but neither did I (except that last post). It is implied when you say that people in general are sinful:
    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    We are all sinners
    When you claim that all humans are sinners, you imply that God views them as sinners.


    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    Well you are assuming God sends people to Hell now. And that statement is not sarcasm. "Hell" as defined by the Western tradition does not exist in Judaism and did not exist in early Christianity. In fact the translation of words "gahenna", "sheol" and "Hades" in the original texts of the New Testament are only rather clumsily translated as "Hell" into English. But Gahenna, Sheol and Hades are not Hell.
    Exactly. The idea of "hell" was created in order to scare people into converting to Christianity!


    My argument:
    a) We cannot know how God judges people
    b) We have no way of discovering how God judges people
    c) Using logic is the only way that we can come to a conclusion about this judgment because the only other explanation would have to be illogical and we have no reason to believe an illogical argument.
    d) If it is illogical that "Joe" is sinful and would be punished, then it cannot be true.
    Last edited by bobloblaw; April 28th, 2009 at 02:25 PM.

  16. #16
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dallas, The Buckle of the Bible Belt, Texas
    Posts
    1,160
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparti
    Well you are assuming God sends people to Hell now. And that statement is not sarcasm. "Hell" as defined by the Western tradition does not exist in Judaism and did not exist in early Christianity. In fact the translation of words "gahenna", "sheol" and "Hades" in the original texts of the New Testament are only rather clumsily translated as "Hell" into English. But Gahenna, Sheol and Hades are not Hell.

    Gahenna
    1. A place or state of torment or suffering.
    2. The abode of condemned souls; hell.
    [Late Latin, from Greek Geenna, from Hebrew gê’ hinnōm]

    In regards to the OP, orginal sin couldn't have existed legally. But lets not forget that God, being omniscient, already knew A&E's fate but that doesn't matter. Regardless of whether A&E were told not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. A&E had no clue what good and evil were and had no clue that disobeying god was a sin. If you have no knowledge of right and wrong and you commit an evil act, you are not punished in the same way that someone with knowledge of right and wrong are. If you don't know right from wrong, you are considered legally insane. A&E were created "legally insane" by default since they didn't know right from wrong prior to eating the fruit. Also, they were already going to die because they never had the opportunity to eat from the Tree of Life which would have given them eternal life. Death didn't enter into the world because of any original sin, it was already here until someone got to the tree of life, which no one had the chance to get too. An omniscient god should have known all this and if a god isn't omniscient, is he worthy of being called god?

    Lets try this analogy:
    • I am a father of two very young children, perhaps two and three years old.
    • I tell them that they can play with anything in the house but they are not to play with the book of matches that I leave laying on the coffee table in the living room.
    • I tell them I am going to go away for awhile but that I will be back shortly.
    • Before leaving I take a gallon of gasoline into the house and empty it on all the living room furniture.
    • I leave my two young children in the care of my teenage son who I know is "more crafty than any of the children I have made."
    • I also know that this teenage son has a nasty habit of convincing others to play with matches.
    • When I return I discover that the house is burning and my two young children are trapped inside. Outside, my teenage son is gleefully watching the flames.
    • I stand beside him and watch the house burn while listening to the screams of my two young children. I refuse to go into the house on my own accord and save them. I will stand back and allow them to burn alive unless they first ask me to save them. If they don't ask me to be saved it is entirely their fault that they are being burned alive.
    • I am a wise and merciful father who is allowed to treat his children any way I like because I, after all, created them. Without me they wouldn't be here, now trapped inside a burning house.
    • I am a loving father because I have given my children an escape clause. Even though I constructed the whole scenario knowing full well the outcome would mean me standing outside watching my children trapped inside a burning house, I was loving enough to give them an escape clause. Of course, this clause only works on the condition that my children ask to be saved. Until they do that, I will stand back and allow them to burn. I will not raise one finger to help them unless I hear them ask. My love knows no bounds.
    My question is this: If I behaved in this manner with my own children would I be considered the type of father worthy of love, admiration, and respect? Or might I be looked upon as a sick, cruel, psychopathic, and heartless monster deserving only derision, loathing, disgust, or pity? Would my actions be considered moral or immoral, my underlying intentions kind or malign? Is my offering of a so-called "escape clause" really demonstrating mercy or does it entail something else altogether, something darker, more self-serving, egocentric and selfish? Finally, am I demonstrating unconditional love with this type of behavior or only that when push comes to shove I really don't give a damn about anyone else's feelings but my own?

    Source
    Last edited by Itsdarts; April 29th, 2009 at 04:17 AM.


    Opposing theory to the creation of the "known universe". Read it carefully, it's not a difficult read on physics and quantum mechanics.

  17. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The real Miami
    Posts
    276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    ummm....thats a pretty crappy father.

    There are other questions that I need answered:

    1) Where do we learn to lie? It seems to me that children lie on their own when they are smart enough to know that trouble can be avoided if they dont tell the truth. Are we natural born liars?

    2) Lucifer did not eat of the tree of knowledge. That means that it is possible to sin without eating the fruit. so perhaps intelligent beings simply have the capacity to do bad things?
    CHANGE is what the world awaits
    Could there be Peace or War?
    The Answer? No one knows.
    Just trusting the break of dawn.

  18. #18
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Venus
    Posts
    3,908
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    1) I don't think anybody learn you how to lie. It is natural to try and protect your image. So children do it, not because they want to lie, but because they fear rejection maybe? I think we are all born liars, some people just happen to use it more often than others.

    2) Of course we all have the capacity to do bad things. It is simply human nature to do bad. The difference is that some people have a tough time identifying when they are doing really bad things. Things that can harm other people for instance. Some people find self control coming more easily than others do. Some people just have a more nagging conscience than others I guess.
    >>]Aspoestertjie[<<

    ODN Rules

    Join our Facebook Page here!

  19. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dallas, The Buckle of the Bible Belt, Texas
    Posts
    1,160
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackturtle View Post
    ummm....thats a pretty crappy father.

    There are other questions that I need answered:

    1) Where do we learn to lie? It seems to me that children lie on their own when they are smart enough to know that trouble can be avoided if they dont tell the truth. Are we natural born liars?

    2) Lucifer did not eat of the tree of knowledge. That means that it is possible to sin without eating the fruit. so perhaps intelligent beings simply have the capacity to do bad things?
    The bible doesn't make it clear (makes no mention of it) that the serpant ate from the tree or not. If we assume that the serpant was indeed Lucifer, then Lucifer was originally an angel and knew what god knew. Since God put Lucifer here, wouldn't it be gods fault that sin entered the world? The point was that A&E didn't know what sin was prior to eating the fruit. The "sin" was disobeying god but it can be argued that its not a sin to the person commiting the sin if that person doesn't know its right or wrong.

    As for question #1, I wouldn't be surprised of lying was an evolutionary trait. I've never been a fan of psychology or psychiatry as a "science" so its hard for me to say. Lying isn't always bad. I will always lie when it comes to hurting someones feelings, for instance, when my wife asks, "do these pants make me look fat"? I never say no, it's the fat that makes you look fat. I simply lie and say No. I lie because I know it would hurt her feelings and I know it would mean "the beat down" is coming if I don't lie.


    Opposing theory to the creation of the "known universe". Read it carefully, it's not a difficult read on physics and quantum mechanics.

  20. #20
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The real Miami
    Posts
    276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Original Sin

    Quote Originally Posted by Itsdarts View Post
    The bible doesn't make it clear (makes no mention of it) that the serpant ate from the tree or not. If we assume that the serpant was indeed Lucifer, then Lucifer was originally an angel and knew what god knew. Since God put Lucifer here, wouldn't it be gods fault that sin entered the world? The point was that A&E didn't know what sin was prior to eating the fruit. The "sin" was disobeying god but it can be argued that its not a sin to the person commiting the sin if that person doesn't know its right or wrong.

    As for question #1, I wouldn't be surprised of lying was an evolutionary trait. I've never been a fan of psychology or psychiatry as a "science" so its hard for me to say. Lying isn't always bad. I will always lie when it comes to hurting someones feelings, for instance, when my wife asks, "do these pants make me look fat"? I never say no, it's the fat that makes you look fat. I simply lie and say No. I lie because I know it would hurt her feelings and I know it would mean "the beat down" is coming if I don't lie.
    Agreed. I am assuming that lucifer did not eat of the tree. As far as i have heard, he grew jealous of god (envy, which is a sin) because he thought that he deserved to be the most powerful. Without eating the fruit. He was like any human (you see someone with something you dont have, and you feel jealous). My argument is, that the tree doesnt matter. sin came along on its own, possibly meaning that god bought sin, but never comitted it.
    CHANGE is what the world awaits
    Could there be Peace or War?
    The Answer? No one knows.
    Just trusting the break of dawn.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Can something exist in two locations ?
    By Vandaler in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: March 14th, 2009, 06:08 PM
  2. Snoop's original songs
    By Snoop in forum Entertainment
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: December 24th, 2005, 07:36 PM
  3. Joint Effort
    By Dionysus in forum Writing Club
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: October 18th, 2005, 03:27 PM
  4. Mormonism
    By Montalban in forum Religion
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: June 10th, 2005, 01:06 AM
  5. The Oxford Papyri
    By 3rdPersonPlural in forum Religion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: February 22nd, 2005, 10:52 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •