cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index cj.myfreeforum.org
NEWS, prophecy, dreams, ZionsCRY, Bible, teaching, visions
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Creation, Evolution, Young Earth, gap theory
Page 1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> CHAPEL
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.

Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top
Site Admin

Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32228

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:42 am    Post subject: Creation, Evolution, Young Earth, gap theory  Reply with quote

Evolution or Creation

Young Earth debate

Young Earth - Evolution-Creation Debate
Feb 8, 2014   Ken Ham
Fires Back at Pat Robertson Over Young Earth Creationism.
Creation Museum CEO and President Ken Ham fired back at "The 700 Club" host Pat Robertson who blasted Ham's young earth views, calling Robertson misinformed and deceived.

Sad that so many will believe Robertson who is neither a scientist, nor a Bible scholar rather than open their Bibles and see that evolution and millions of years are totally incompatible with the first 11 chapters of Genesis and rather than think for themselves and check out creationist web sites like Answers in Genesis, Ham wrote.

On Wednesday Feb 6, 2014, Pat Robertson talked about the debate that took place Tuesday night at the Creation Museum in Kentucky between Ham and evolutionist Bill Nye "The Science Guy," and accused the creationist of making a mockery of Christians with his young earth views.

"Anyone who is in the oil business knows he's drilling down, 2 miles, 3 miles underground, you're coming into all these layers that were laid down by the dinosaurs," Robertson said. "And we have skeletons of dinosaurs that go back like 65 million years. And to say that it all came around 6,000 years ago is nonsense."

Young Earth
Pat Robertson (700 Club) insists the Bible does not claim that the earth is 6,000 years old.  Sad
Ham said essentially that Christian leaders and Christian college and seminary professors are uninformed and deceived.
Protestant pastors are split on the age of the earth.  Nearly half dont believe the earth is approximately 6,000 years old.

I used to watch 700 Club and I am sad to see Pat Robertson part of the 666 Beast.

Scopes II
Did the debate change anyone's mind?

3 Million Watched Evolution-Creation Debate, but How Many Minds Changed?
The topic for the debate was "Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era?" Ham, CEO of Answers in Genesis, which owns the Creation Museum, presented the argument for creation. Ham based his arguments on what he said was a misrepresentation of the definition of the word science, particularly in the differences between observational and historical science.

3 million viewers watched last night's evolution/creation debate between Bill Nye "The Science Guy" and Ken Ham, founder of the Creation Museum, which was the location of the much-discussed event.

In what some observers have dubbed "Scopes II," Nye and Ham sparred in a cordial yet spirited debate in front of a live audience that braved a winter storm. At least 10,000 groups watched a live stream of the debate in a public venue, and about 750,000 computers logged on to the debate.

With the thousands of groups viewing the debate in churches, schools and other places, and with families watching at home, it is reasonable to estimate that a minimum of four people were watching per single log in via debatelive.org. One location, Liberty University, reported 1,500 debate viewers on its campus.

Facebook reported the debate was the No. 1 trending topic for many hours before the event began. On Twitter, #creationdebate and Ken Ham occupied the worldwide Twitter trending topic during and after the debate. For a time, the event was half of Twitter's trending topics.

The debate was moderated by the capable Tom Foreman of CNN. Right after the debate, Nye and Ham were interviewed on CNN's Piers Morgan Live and then by Dan Harris, a correspondent with ABC's Nightline program. Also last night, MSNBC's The Last Word interviewed Mr. Nye by himself inside the Creation Museum. About 70 media representatives were able to beat the incoming storm to attend.

The topic for the debate was "Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era?" Ham, CEO of Answers in Genesis, which owns the Creation Museum, presented the argument for creation. Ham based his arguments on what he said was a misrepresentation of the definition of the word science, particularly in the differences between observational and historical science.

"There is a distinct difference in what you observe and what has taken place in the past," Ham said. "Creationists and evolutionists disagree on how to interpret data regarding the origins of our universe, and we can't prove either way observationally, because all we've got is the present. When it comes down to it, this is a battle over philosophical worldviews."

Last edited by CJ on Tue Jul 21, 2015 10:14 am; edited 8 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Site Admin

Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32228

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Abusing Creation and the Decline of the Church
Jan 4, 2014
 Six Days: The Age of the Earth and the Decline of the Church.
Ken Ham asserts that the church is in decline because it is distorting and abusing the Bible account of creation.
Christianity? Today magazine doubts a literal Adam. Where does this lead?
To the compromise of the authority of Scripture.
Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis - an EXCELLENT book.

Being Salt and Light as a Nation Decays
Feb 8, 2014
Jan and co-host Eric Barger talk to Moody Church (Chicago) Pastor Erwin Lutzer. How can we be salt and light as the nation and culture decay? This is not a downbeat hour although Lutzer does compare the dilemma of ancient Israel and the prophet Jeremiah's warnings to them to America. How to live above the calamity of our times.

Understanding The Times Prophecy in news

This thread includes the age of earth among other popular heresies today.
Young Earth Creationist Ministry's Biggest Critics: Christians
For 30 years, Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis has advocated a literal, straightforward reading of Genesis, the first book of the Bible. Interestingly, his staunchest critics have been fellow Christians.
Ham believes that God is the Creator of the universe and that it took six literal days for God to create everything. That view, he says, is a consequence of accepting the authority of the Word of God as infallible. To reject that belief is to undermine that authority.
Yet many Christians not only dismiss the literal reading of the Creation account but also feel embarrassed by it.

GOD is calling the Church to prepare to stand

HARBINGER  WARNINGS - Isaiah 9 prophecy
When GOD destroys USA, you cant say He didnt WARN us!


DAILY NEWS with prophetic analysis  


Last edited by CJ on Tue Jul 21, 2015 10:07 am; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Site Admin

Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32228

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

New Evolution Documentary Aims to Keep Science In, and Religion Out, of Classrooms
Oct 2011
A new documentary about evolution, "No Dinosaurs in Heaven," is looking to push creationist teachers out of American classrooms to prevent the "hijacking of science education by religious fundamentalists." The film accuses such teachers of "dangerously undermining scientific literacy."

The tone of the movie, which is directed by Greta Schiller and produced by Jezebel Productions Shocked , is averse to the "anti-evolution activities" that allegedly threaten free scientific development in American schools. According to the website for "No Dinosaurs in Heaven," the documentary takes a stand that is very critical of those with creationist beliefs. The goal of the movie, according to the press release, is to "keep science in, religion out of our public school science classrooms."

"As a filmmaker, I felt it was imperative that I weave together, in a comprehensive, thought provoking visual essay, ideas about what science is, how it is taught, why it can be celebrated as a creative human endeavor and why it is crucial that evolution is put front and center of science education," Schiller said in a statement.

"Our film addresses the urgent need for us to make science education a priority or risk continuing to make wrong decisions concerning the survival of the planet," the statement on the documentary's Facebook page reads. "We aim to raise awareness of the euphemisms and strategies used by the anti-evolution activities, and to empower parents, teachers, administrators, students and policy makers in their struggles to ensure public schools teach real science.”

The film follows the executive director of the National Center for Science Education, Eugenie Scott, down the Colorado River. Throughout the trip, the scientist attempts to disprove creationist theories about the Grand Canyon being only a few thousand years old and holding evidence of the biblical flood, according to the Religion News Service.

Teaching evolution remains a controversial issue. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., writing as a columnist for The Christian Post, called naturalistic evolution "the great intellectual rival to Christianity in the Western world."
"It is the creation myth of the secular elites and their intellectual weapon of choice in public debate," he wrote.

A 2010 Gallup poll revealed that 40 percent of Americans believe in creationism – that is, that God created humans in their present form about 10,000 years ago.

New Giant Skulls Found
Many cone shaped skulls have been found worldwide, Evidence of the Nephilim,
the offspring of the Giants, the Fallen Angeles, Anunnaki,  Pharoahs of Egypt, Sumerians, Maya, Inca.  Genesis 6:4

Sons of GOD - NEPHILIM - demon seed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Site Admin

Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32228

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Advice for Ken Ham in the Creation-Evolution Debate
January 27, 2014
 Posted by Don Boys before the debate
The creation/evolution debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham may not become a clash between a table-banging atheist and a Bible-thumping creationist, but it will come close. New Atheists have their knickers in a knot because the Feb. 4 debate may expose evolutionists/atheists for the fools they are. (God said it first!) An evolutionist who is dumb enough to go head to head with an informed creationist usually gets his head handed to him on a platter.

Richard Dawkins and his rabble are fearful of this coming encounter. Some evolutionists are even preparing excuses for Nye’s defeat: “He only has a bachelor’s degree.” “He’s an engineer, not a biologist.” Others have said that Nye will treat the debate as a joke, but if so, the joke will be on him.

Dawkins has interjected himself into this debate by pontificating: “They [creationists] want to be seen on a platform with a real scientist, because that conveys the idea that here is a genuine argument between scientists.” Only a fool, a falsifier, or fanatic declares that all scientists are in agreement on the issue of origins! One major, obvious disagreement is between Neo-Darwinists and punctuated equilibrium devotees. Of course, the huge difference is between those scientists who believe in evolution and those scientists who believe in creationism–there are thousands of them!

Dawkins has said that “Scientists should not debate creationists. Period.” In that, Dawkins is right, at least from their perspective because they almost always lose the debates!

Dawkins added incorrectly, “They [creationists] may not win the argument–in fact, they will not win the argument, but it makes it look like there really is an argument to be had.” Sorry, Dick, you are in a dream world. Dawkins got wounded when an Australian film producer asked him a question about the origin of information and Dick was silent for 19 minutes (not 11 as reported) before he came up with an answer that did not relate to the question! Now, he is denying it happened! And Dawkins has the audacity to say of creationists, “Their dishonesty stops nowhere.” I think Dawkins’ honesty has never started.

Concerning evolution/creation debates, famous evolutionist Niles Eldredge confessed in his book, Monkey Business, “The creationists nearly always win….Creationists today–at least the majority of their spokesmen–are highly educated, intelligent people. Skilled debaters, they have always done their homework. And they nearly always seem better informed than their opponents, who are reduced too often to a bewildered state of incoherence.” So, it’s no surprise that evolutionists are concerned about the “Shoot-out at the O.K. Corral” in Kentucky.

Since Ken and I are on the same team, I will provide him some unsolicited advice (although I’m sure he is “loaded for bear”) on how to handle “the science guy.” Scientific creationism has been discussed, debated, denigrated, denied but never disproved; and the “science guy” will discover that when he visits Kentucky. My advice to Nye is to run away from this debate as if his hair was on fire!

Ham should challenge Nye to declare that he does or does not believe the unsupportable, even outrageous teaching that nothing created everything. Ham should promise not to laugh out loud, maybe only a snicker or two. If Nye follows the path taken by others, he will try to flimflam common people with scientific jargon, psycho-babble, and gibberish. He should be pressed to make his points in clear, concise, and common English. He may try to laugh it away but Ham should not permit him to get away with that.

Ham should demand an explanation as to how all the scientific laws such as gravity, inertia, the First and Second Laws, laws of planetary motion, and others came into existence. After all, “laws” cannot evolve. Were those laws operating before or after the Big Bang?

I would then ask Nye to produce evidence that an explosion has ever resulted in order. Nye may then try to declare that evolutionists don’t believe the Big Bang was an explosion but Nye is lying or is uninformed if he defends that myth. Press him, kindly, of course.

I would then ask how life first formed on a planet made entirely of rock! Then force him to admit that he believes in spontaneous generation that no sane person believes! Press harder.

I would then ask why, if the earth is billions of years old, no meteorites are found in “ancient” strata. That was zero, nil, zip, nothing! Everyone admits that meteorites have always fallen so where is the evidence if the earth is ancient?

I then would ask which evolved first, the mouth, the stomach, the digestive system, or the elimination system. After all, what good is a mouth if you don’t have a stomach? No sensible person says they all evolved together. Yes, evolution requires miracles but only one every few million years. Not four miracles happening at the same time!

I would then ask about DNA. Since everyone admits that DNA is a code, ask who wrote the code. Books, codes, messages, letters, notes, emails, etc., do not self-compose, well except in the fairytale world of the evolutionists. Who wrote the DNA code? Press real hard!

I would then demand to know how blind chemistry created mind/intelligence, meaning, altruism, and morality. The “science guy” will probably sweat, squirm, stutter, and stammer about here.

I would then ask him to explain the symbiotic relationship between wild creatures such as the Nile crock and the Egyptian plover that walks into the crock’s mouth to clean out parasites then walks out without any harm. How does such evolution happen without the crock getting an easy, tasty meal and the plover getting dead?
I would ask how it is possible for fresh (not fossilized) blood cells to be discovered in dinosaurs that are alleged to be more than 60 million years old. That doesn’t happen in the real world.

Evolution is simply a humanist, materialistic religion that seeks to explain man’s origins. It’s not a very good religion. It doesn’t even have any holidays except April 1, although most evolutionists get rather pious on the anniversary of the founding of the ACLU.

Every evolutionist I have met and observed and read after brings up the “creation is religion and evolution is science” axiom as if that settles the matter. But how can evolution be science when it can’t be observed, tested, or demonstrated? The fact is, evolution is as scientific as a voodoo-rooster-plucking ceremony in Haiti–almost!
Evolution is like a blind man in a dark basement looking for a black cat–that isn’t there.
Press on, Ken, press on.

Bill Nye couldnt dance either - on Dancing with the Stars  
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Site Admin

Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32228

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 6:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Twisted Evil   Emergent Church Leaders Promote Evolution
Emergent Church leaders Sally Morgenthaler, Spencer Burke, Doug Pagitt and Brian McLaren are joining “Evolutionary Evangelist” * Michael Dowd in the promotion of evolutionary spirituality, long taught by leading New Age gurus like Barbara Marx Hubbard. Dowd sent out this press release yesterday about the new project.

Evolutionary evangelist Michael Dowd (wolf) is pitching evolution and honor science.
Dowd has a living library of pseudochristians on the leading edge of science and religion, where mythic beliefs and reality collide.

His guests also include Brian McLaren, named by Time magazine as one of America’s 25 most influential evangelicals; Catholic theologian John Haught and Brown University biologist Ken Miller, both key witnesses for the plaintiff at the 2005 Dover ‘intelligent design’ trial; Wired magazine co-founder Kevin Kelly; Ian Lawton, pastor of the Michigan church that recently made national news for removing its cross; Sister Joan Chittister, co-chair of the U.N. Global Peace Initiative of Women; and Sister Gail Worcelo, co-founder of Green Mountain Monastery with Thomas Berry; Bishop John Shelby Spong, whose books on evolving faith have sold more than a million copies; Matthew Fox, defrocked by now Pope Benedict XVI for embracing Creation Spirituality; Paul Smith, a veteran pastor who was kicked out of the Southern Baptist Convention for blessing gay unions; and 30 other evolutionary Christians.

* Michael Dowd is false. This wickedness will draw the wrath of GOD.
A Gallup poll reveals that 4 in ten Americans still believe that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form.
This Evil 'New Spirituality' will face judgment day.   It is the religion of the Beast - 666 - worship of Lucifer aka Satan.

* This was on topic elsewhere - I added it here
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Didn't watch the debate, but pretty much this Bill Nye guy, like all evolutionist "experts", made a complete fool out of himself. No surprise, as they don't have a shred of evidence to back up their claims, while these creationist bible believers like Ham have the WHOLE council of God to guide them. Very Happy

As for these "Christian evolutionists" - they're more or less walking after their own lusts and following after earthly riches.

1Timothy 6:3  If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
1Ti 6:4  He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
1Ti 6:5  Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness
: from such withdraw thyself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 12 Dec 2009
Posts: 17167

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2014 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

(Friday Church News Notes, February 14, 2014, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143)

- The following is excerpted from "Answering Bill Nye," Around the World with Ken Ham, Feb. 8, 2014:

"During my recent debate with Bill Nye 'The Science Guy' at the Creation Museum, Mr. Nye ... made a false claim about our state of Kentucky and its medical technology. It caught the eye of a diagnostic radiologist, who wrote a letter to Bill Nye to correct him [about the] false charge that the state of Kentucky does not have a nuclear medicine program within its borders. Apparently it was Nye's attempt to show that the Creation Museum's home state is backward technologically, and that the museum has supposedly been contributing to scientific illiteracy in Kentucky. ... 'Bill, I thank you for your time and effort in participating in the debate with Ken Ham. I am a Bible-believing Christian and a physician--a diagnostic radiologist, in fact. I graduated from MIT with a degree of biology, and went on to New York University for my medical school. I was not a believer of Christ then, but I am a believer now. ... You state: "Right now, there is no place in the Commonwealth of Kentucky to get a degree in this kind of nuclear medicine." ... You could have used the website of the Nuclear Medicine Technology Certification Board, the governing body for certifying individuals to be a nuclear medicine technologist. In their list of accredited schools for nuclear medicine technologists, Kentucky has two: one in Louisville at Jefferson Community College, and the other in Lexington at Bluegrass Community & Technical College. ... If you go further down the list for the State of Washington (where Nye Labs LLC is located, as per your Contact Bill Nye webpage), there is only one, at Bellevue College in Bellevue, WA. So, by your argument (of using the number of nuclear medicine technology schools as a reflection of that state's scientific sophistication), perhaps you should be worried that your state of Washington is a bit behind Kentucky in technological and scientific sophistication, and I hope that you find that "troubling" and hope you're "concerned" about that. By your argument, Kentucky is twice as scientifically literate as Washington. ... Perhaps you owe an apology to the citizens of Kentucky in the live and Internet audience regarding your comment about their state.'"

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Site Admin

Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32228

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What is the Gap Theory?
Did anything happen between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?

Answer: Genesis 1:1-2 states, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.” The Gap Theory is the view that God created a fully functional earth with all animals, including the dinosaurs and other creatures we know only from the fossil record. Then, the theory goes, something happened to destroy the earth completely—some speculate it was the fall of Satan to earth—so that the earth became without form and void. At this point, God started all over again, recreating the earth in its paradise form as further described in Genesis.

There are too many problems with this theory to describe adequately in a brief response, not the least of which is that if something important had occurred between the two verses, God would have told us so. God would not have left us to speculate in ignorance about such important events. Second, Genesis 1:31 says God declared His creation to be “very good,” which He certainly could not say if evil had already entered the world via Satan’s fall in the “gap.” Along the same line, if the fossil record is to be explained by the millions of years in the gap, that means death, disease, and suffering were common many ages before Adam fell. But the Bible tells us that it was Adam’s sin that introduced death, disease, and suffering to all life: “Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin.” (Romans 5:12)

Those who hold to the Gap Theory do so in order to reconcile the theories of modern scientists who hold to the old-earth theory—the belief that the earth is billions of years older than can be accounted for by adding up the genealogies of man found in the Bible. Even well-meaning evangelicals have bought into the old-earth theory, handling much of Genesis 1 allegorically, while attempting to hold to a literal interpretation of the rest of Scripture. The danger in this is in determining at what point to stop allegorizing and begin interpreting literally. Was Adam a literal person? How do we know? If he was not, then did he really bring sin into the human race, or can we allegorize that as well? And if there was no literal Adam to introduce the sin which we all inherit, then there was no reason for Jesus to die on the cross. A non-literal original sin denies the reason for Christ’s coming in the first place, as explained in 1 Corinthians 15:22: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” At that point, Christianity itself becomes a hoax and the Bible just a nice book of stories and fables. Can we not see where this type of “reasoning” gets us?

Genesis 1 simply cannot be reconciled with the notion that creation occurred over long periods of time, nor that these periods occurred in the space between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. What took place between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2? Absolutely nothing! Genesis 1:1 tells us that God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:2 informs us that when He first created the earth, it was formless, empty, and dark; it was not finished and not yet inhabited by creatures. The rest of Genesis chapter 1 tells us how God completed the formless, empty, and dark earth by filling it with life, beauty, and goodness. The Bible is true, literal, and perfect (Psalm 19:7-9). Science has never disproved anything in the Bible and it never will. The Bible is supreme truth and therefore is the standard by which scientific theory should be evaluated, not the other way around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Site Admin

Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32228

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gap creationism - Excerpt:
Gap creationism became increasingly attractive near the end of the eighteenth century and first half of the nineteenth century, because the newly established science of geology had determined that the Earth was far older than common interpretations of Genesis and the Bible-based Flood geology would allow. Gap creation allowed religious geologists (who composed the majority of the geological community at the time) to reconcile their faith in the Bible with the new authority of science. According to the doctrine of natural theology, science was in this period considered a second revelation, God's word in nature as well as in Scripture, so the two could not contradict each other.[4]

Gap creationism was popularized by Thomas Chalmers,[5] a professor at the University of Edinburgh, founder of the Free Church of Scotland, and author of one of the Bridgewater Treatises, who attributed it to 17th century Dutch Arminian theologian Simon Episcopius. Other early proponents included Oxford University geology professor and fellow Bridgewater author William Buckland, Sharon Turner and Edward Hitch****.[4]

It gained widespread attention when a "second creative act"[6] was discussed prominently in the reference notes for Genesis in the influential 1917 Scofield Reference Bible.[4]


Free Church of Scotland (1843–1900)

Great importance was attached to maintaining an educated ministry within the Free Church. Because the established Church of Scotland controlled the divinity faculties of the universities, the FC set up its own colleges. New College was opened in 1850 with five chairs; Christ's College and Trinity College (1856) followed later. The first generation of teachers were enthusiastic proponents of Westminster Calvinism. This position was soon abandoned, as theologians such as Dr A. B. Bruce, Marcus Dods and George Adam Smith began to teach a more liberal understanding of the faith. 'Believing criticism' of the Bible was a central approach taught by such as William Robertson Smith. Attempts were made between 1890 and 1895 to bring many of these professors to the bar of the Assembly on charges of heresy, but these moves failed, with only minor warnings being issued.

This is an EXCELLENT sermon EXPOSING this heretical Genesis 1:1/1:2 gap theory nonsense!

The Gap Theory

The Gap Theory Part 2

The Gap Theory Part 3

The Gap Theory Part 4

posted by BornAgain2 on another thread, I combined these two

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> CHAPEL All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14  Next
Page 1 of 14

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum