Announcement

Collapse

Islam Guidelines

Theists only.

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to Islam. This forum is generally for theists only, and is not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theist may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.



Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

A Superbly Flawed Quran..

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

  • Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
    Hello Siam sahib. Kindly do something right and proper for a change, ok? Show us WHERE and when I or Christians on Theologyweb ever said “hate the Muslims” and “hate islam” in that format, inciting people to “hate muslims” aggressively in the way you insinuate in your post below??
    It was you who brought up the point about sura al-fatihah (chapter 1 of the koran) – AFTER I had previously asked some genuine questions about doubtful aspects in this koranic chapter. Weirdly but Unsurprisingly, you deliberately IGNORED to answer the points I raised – as usual, and went on and on about the poetic and aesthetic but wholly irrelevant “beauty” of this sura. Trying to show sura fatiha’s “attractiveness” perhaps in a futile effort to neutralize the hate speech taught and promoted in sura fatihah (1) v.6-7.

    NOW, you try to hide behind FALSE accusations on the Christians that are BASELESS as they are patently IRRELEVANT. This is just another worthless deflection tactic from you to run away from answering my GENUINE query that is not hate speech in any way!

    Then, you also shamelessly insinuate things about Jesus Christ that neither you nor the Koran are qualified to claim nor pontificate or preach to Christians about. We Christians have time and time again said the JESUS of the Gospel IS NOT THE SAME JESUS FOUND IN THE KORAN. We reject the caricature and deformity that the koran presumptuously calls “Isa” to equate him with the Biblical Jesus Christ BUT that only came 700 years after the original facts recorded in the earliest records about Christ.

    Because you have pretentiously ignored the material Question that is DIRECTLY pertinent to sura 1 of the koran, you have another chance to answer the genuine and sincere question about the HATE SPEECH enjoined in the very FIRST and opening chapter of your Koran itself..:

    In sura 1 vs 6-7, Muslims pray that Allah guide them to the straight path, saving them from the path of those who have incurred his anger and/or who have gone astray:

    "Show us the straight way, The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose portion is not WRATH, and who go not ASTRAY." A. Yusuf Ali.

    According to the MUSLIM (NOT Christian) authorities, the true meanings of verses 6-7 are that THE JEWS are the ones who have incurred Allah’s WRATH/CURSE/CONDEMNATION, and THE CHRISTIANS are those who have GONE ASTRAY & LOST THEIR WAY:
    "The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians)." S. 1:7 Hilali-Khan

    Narrated Adi bin Hatim: I asked Allah’s Messenger – Muhamed - about the Statement of Allah: "Gharil maghdubi ‘alaihim - not the way of those who earned Your Anger - WRATH AND CURSE!" he replied: "THEY ARE THE JEWS".

    And 2: "Walad dallin (nor of those who went astray)," he replied: "THE CHRISTIANS, and they are THE ONES WHO WENT ASTRAY".

    This is confirmation of indisputable VILIFICATION and Hate Speech from these koran verses against the Christian and the Jews, nothing LESS.

    [This Hadith is quoted by At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud]. (Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble QurÂ’an in the English Language with Comments from Tafsir At-Tabari, Tafsir Al-Qurtubi and Tafsir Ibn Kathir and Ahadith from Sahih Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and other Ahadith books [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Lahore, Houston, New York], Part 1: From Surah 1 to 5, p. 30.

    The above statements are 100% CONFIRMATION from recognised modern muslim scholars and authorities like Muhd Muhsin Khan, Taqiuddin al-Hilali and the classical ulamas and the Tafsirs (commentaries, exegesis etc) of recognised luminaries like ibn Kathir, Tabari, Qurtubi
    THIS is the Koran’s real HATE speech that calls for God’s wrathful curses upon the Jews AND unwarranted VILIFICATION of Christians as “lost souls gone astray” seventeen times a day, EVERY SINGLE DAY when muslims do the salat / namaz / compulsory prayers daily. THAT’S THE REAL HATE SPEECH, siam.

    Answer me, WHY does the koran incite such vicious hate speech against Christians and Jews among the muslims ? – That is its real teachings & instructions – and confirmed by all the reputable Islamic tafsir authorities. And please, don’t come up with some patronizing nonsense that the Biblical Jesus teaches the same kind of things as the above in the koran. That is just shameless and baseless deflection to avoid the hate speech and vilifications against Jews and Christians explicitly enjoined in your Koran!
    Great "tell it like it is" post, sir!!!

    Comment


    • You know, Trucker, I've got a not-so-strange hunch that siam will again, run away and ignore the above questions posed to muslims.

      Either that, or he'll avoid answering them truthfully and try to proffer some deflecting non-answer of irrelevance by saying Christians are hateful and the Bible has such things too..

      It's a typical cowardly escape from missionaries of that religion. Just so pathetic and sad!


      Originally posted by Trucker View Post
      Great "tell it like it is" post, sir!!!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
        You know, Trucker, I've got a not-so-strange hunch that siam will again, run away and ignore the above questions posed to muslims.

        Either that, or he'll avoid answering them truthfully and try to proffer some deflecting non-answer of irrelevance by saying Christians are hateful and the Bible has such things too..

        It's a typical cowardly escape from missionaries of that religion. Just so pathetic and sad!
        That would just be standard operating procedure if my experience dealing with Muslims is any indication! Misrepresent and attack Christianity and all it stands for while keeping the discussion away from any factual, realistic historical Islam. Simply S.O.P.!!!

        Comment


        • An eastern Muslim scholar like Yasir Qadhi shouldn't have gone to Yale university in the USA to get an M.Phil followed by a PhD in islam and koranic studies.

          Here, Dr.Jay Smith analyses an interview between Y.Qadhi and Mohd.Hijab, an aggressive muslim evangelist and da'i. The outcome is unsatisfactory much to M.Hijab who kept pressing Qadhi for a clear answer which Qadhi kept resisting and even waffles many times.

          https://youtu.be/vstGbZkjUcw

          Eastern muslim scholars are already embracing western scholastic conclusions about the Qiraat, ahruf, masahif and other aspects of koranic analysis and studies.

          In the tradition of Ali Dashti and even ibn Khaldun, there are brave modern muslim scholars who are unsure of the preservation and reliability of their Koran AND are saying so, themselves.


          Originally posted by Trucker View Post
          That would just be standard operating procedure if my experience dealing with Muslims is any indication! Misrepresent and attack Christianity and all it stands for while keeping the discussion away from any factual, realistic historical Islam. Simply S.O.P.!!!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
            An eastern Muslim scholar like Yasir Qadhi shouldn't have gone to Yale university in the USA to get an M.Phil followed by a PhD in islam and koranic studies.

            Here, Dr.Jay Smith analyses an interview between Y.Qadhi and Mohd.Hijab, an aggressive muslim evangelist and da'i. The outcome is unsatisfactory much to M.Hijab who kept pressing Qadhi for a clear answer which Qadhi kept resisting and even waffles many times.

            https://youtu.be/vstGbZkjUcw

            Eastern muslim scholars are already embracing western scholastic conclusions about the Qiraat, ahruf, masahif and other aspects of koranic analysis and studies.

            In the tradition of Ali Dashti and even ibn Khaldun, there are brave modern muslim scholars who are unsure of the preservation and reliability of their Koran AND are saying so, themselves.
            Jay Smith has much to say about Islam.

            Try this one:
            : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EaopH_EPfc

            Very thought provoking, eh what?

            I suggest bookmarking it and taking notes.The inquisitive may wish to watch it more than once.

            Comment


            • Yes, it is not only the clips by Jay Smith and Hatun Tash which are worth book-marking to learn about the mutiple korans and the confused and sorry state of Koranic documentary studies today - exemplified by the open conflicts that recently happened between Muslims Mohd.Hijab and Yasir Qadhi.

              Muslims like Al-Fadi of Saudi Arabia and Rachid of Morocco have also exposed the very late and now questionable traditional sources of Islam, like the Sira of Ibn Hisham and ibn Ishaq, al-Bukhari's hadith (and other hadith collections) and the various manuscripts of the Koran itself. They have since left Islam and converted to Christianity after an extended time of searching.







              Originally posted by Trucker View Post
              Jay Smith has much to say about Islam.

              Try this one:
              : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EaopH_EPfc

              Very thought provoking, eh what?

              I suggest bookmarking it and taking notes.The inquisitive may wish to watch it more than once.

              Comment


              • Why did Mohd Hijab a preacher for Islam
                intentionally DELETE 25 minutes of his interview with Dr.Y. Qadhi? What is there to hide?

                Abdullah Sameer, an ex-muslim analyses the response of Mohd.Hijab's reaction about the unreliable preservation of the Koran. Very interesting development. ☝️

                https://youtu.be/Z_8Zv1sB4Aw

                Comment


                • Some Muslims are beginning to denounce Islam due to the recent Quranic preservation conflict between Dr. Yasir Qadhi and Mohd.Hijab, as expected.

                  Hijab's deletion of 25-minutes of his discussion with Dr.Qadhi arouses Muslim suspicions of destruction of evidence, some say damning kind:-

                  https://youtu.be/d09ru0SksTY



                  Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                  Why did Mohd Hijab a preacher for Islam
                  intentionally DELETE 25 minutes of his interview with Dr.Y. Qadhi? What is there to hide?

                  Abdullah Sameer, an ex-muslim analyses the response of Mohd.Hijab's reaction about the unreliable preservation of the Koran. Very interesting development. ☝️

                  https://youtu.be/Z_8Zv1sB4Aw

                  Comment


                  • Siam, you asked and I gave you the links requested. I gave them weeks ago but all you can do siam, is to keep quiet. Naturally, because the facts I shared are not made up.

                    The Muslim Ali Dashti's findings about the Koran:

                    https://1400years.org/books/twentythreeyearsEN.pdf

                    Dashti said that the language and forms of the verses/ayats of your Koran has already been replicated by other Arab speakers. In many places they have superseded the koranic quality.

                    It is worth downloading and it is FREE!

                    Here is another link to an example for that:

                    https://www.amazon.com/True-Furqan-A.../dp/1579211755

                    Called "The True Furqan" . So has the challenge of the Koran's inimitability and "beautiful forms" been met?

                    Of course it has! And been superseded too. In grammar, vocabulary, style and poetic quality.



                    Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                    Some Muslims are beginning to denounce Islam due to the recent Quranic preservation conflict between Dr. Yasir Qadhi and Mohd.Hijab, as expected.

                    Hijab's deletion of 25-minutes of his discussion with Dr.Qadhi arouses Muslim suspicions of destruction of evidence, some say damning kind:-

                    https://youtu.be/d09ru0SksTY

                    Comment


                    • Here are some more recent admissions and honest discussions about the major problems of the Koran's preservation (that it is far from perfect or even early in its historical development).

                      Al-Fadi [a fluent-speaking Arab], Yasir Qadhi and Mohd Hijab [south asians]- ALL three of them muslims, except the first one Al Fadi, who WAS a muslim, before leaving and abandoning Islam to become a born-again Christian according to the words and teaching of Jesus Christ in the Gospel of John Chapter 3 in the Holy Bible.

                      In this fascinating, eye-opening interview with Dr.Jay Smith and David Wood (all with PhDs), they unpack for muslims like Siam and his friends, why Dr.Yasir Qadhi confessed that the "standard narrative (for the Koran) has HOLES IN IT"!

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_i3jzvgBhY

                      It is worthwhile to remember that these scholars and academicians making this admission of the less than perfect preservation of the Koran comes from eastern scholars of Islam and who are all Muslims - like Dr. Yasir Qadhi.

                      The ground is removed from muslim propogandists like Siam who had claimed that it was just the western Koranic scholarship who are making these claims. We now see muslim learned people and scholars who are NOT FROM the western world, but from the eastern hemisphere who confirm the dubious and unreliable nature of the Koran today!

                      Comment


                      • And here, this Jordanian Islamic scholar and well-known "sheikh" from the Arab world - sheikh Abu Abdul Rahman al-Zahiri, writer, thinker and researcher, teacher and student of the Koran - has lost his faith in the "original and authentic sources of Islam". That obviously includes the Koranic sources, sunnah and traditional sources for orthodox Islam today:-

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jKd8z8thF8

                        For muslims and propogandists of islam - get real and honest with yourselves, friends!

                        If Arab speaking Muslims and scholars themselves now cannot accept the early sources of islam as authentic, how can you expect us - the non-Muslims, to ever do the same?


                        Thinking Muslims and islamic scholars are rapidly leaving behind their traditional concepts and notions of Islam today - by the thousands.


                        Look at Iran, Indonesia and now, the Arab Muslims themselves. scholars mind you, NOT mere lay people.

                        Comment


                        • And so, after nearly a month of silence and ignorance our "friend" siam has disappeared and refused to address any of our questions posed above.

                          I suspect he / she is incapable and unable to answer them. Also proving that it was only for muslim missionary activity that he made all his posts.

                          what a shame!

                          Comment




                          • WHEN Simple, Open Questions are asked of Muslims for honest clarification - like the ones BELOW, they will abdicate, avoid and run away, just like Siam did after more than two weeks, isn't that a crying shame for the propogandists and dawagandists of islam?!

                            HOWEVER, there are valid hadith proofs that there are Koran verses and ayats THAT WERE NOT TAWATUR Nor Mutawatir (“wide spread and well known through multiple lines of transmission”) THAT are in the Koran.

                            The fath al-bari reports :

                            “I found the last verse of sura al Tawba in the possession of Abu Khuzaima al Ansari, having found it WITH NO ONE ELSE, ‘There has now come to you…’ to the end of the sura.

                            - p.119, Ahmad b.Ali b. Muhd.Asqalani, ibn Hajar, “Fath al Bari,” 13 vols. Cairo, 1939/1348 vol.9, p.9 - The Commentary of Sahih al-Bukhari’s hadith.

                            This is an example of a verse that IS NON-TAWATUR ie. Not Mutawatir whasoever. Sura 9/128 & 129 were ONLY FOUND With Abu Khuzaima and NOBODY ELSE. Its provenance and reliability is therefore doubted and invalidated by the tawatur criterion!

                            And YET it became a Quran verse in spite of not complying with and defying the orthodox criteria of mutawatir – which 9/128 & 129 is clearly not tawatur as recorded by al-Bukhari himself!

                            Dr. Shady H. Nasser considers this as proof of non-tawatur verses in the Quran, inserted unscrupulously by MAN and not by God for sure.

                            If the so-called “whole community had memorised the koran” like you propagandize, they won’t find sura 9/128-129 ONLY WITH ABU KHUZAIMA! But with other reciters as well! There were NONE as the records prove. Where were the others to make 9/128-129 tawatur??? Where..???

                            If there are TWO such verses – AS IN sura at-tawba 9 VERSES 128 & 129, There could very well be OTHER SUCH words, verses and whole chapters inserted into the koran THAT ARE NOT TAWATUR OR MUTAWATIR!

                            Just HOW Many more of such have been inserted – not by Allah or Jibril, but by the human manufacturers of the Quran?

                            As if the koran could really benefit humanity? How can it do so, when..?-

                            1. Sura 9/30 - blatantly curses Christians – for taking Jesus Christ as THE SON OF GOD, and Jews ALSO for doing that to “Ezra”. Vilification and baseless defamations ARE NOT A BENEFIT! Especially when they’re all baseless and LIES.

                            2. sura 9/29 Sanctions and commands for attacks and killings upon the “people of the Book” ie – Christians and Jews BY MUSLIMS just FOR NOT BELIEVING in muhamed, his Allah and koran “FIGHT ie KILL (Qatala’) against the People of the Book WHO DO NOT BELIEVE in Allah..” (and islam obviously)..

                            These people of the Book were not fighting against muslims. They were ONLY refusing to believe in the lies of Muhamed and islam! That was enough to get them killed! What a non-blessing to Humanity..

                            The justification that islam and muslims “only fight in self-defence” here is destroyed and demolished.

                            The killing against them only "stops" when these people of the book pay the Poll Tax called JIZYA - which is really a bribe and protection money so they will not BE KILLED, as demanded by the pernicious Quran.

                            3. Sura 4/3 – Muslim men can happily take four wives, while the women can only have 1 husband each.

                            Just HOW IS THAT a benefit to humanity?? Today, polygamy is shown to be outdated and a curse on family life.

                            Sura 4/3 – Muslim men CAN ALSO have sex with the females “that their right hand possess”! This shameless permission is valid even today. These are captives of war or kept women or even single women who work for their perverted Muslim male bosses.

                            Don’t these sex perverts just love this ayat sura 4/3 that permit them free sex with such kept women?!? – these are NOT their 4 official wives..but all their unofficial kept women of muslim men that the koran favors with such “rights”

                            JUST HOW CAN Point 3. Above ever be a benefit to humanity???

                            4. Sura 4/34 – Muslim men MUST BEAT THEIR so-called “DISOBEDIENT WIVES How can that ever be a benefit to women – who make up one-half of Humanity?

                            Verse 34 says (of muslim men dealing with ‘offending wives’): “you may admonish them..refuse to share beds with them AND BEAT THEM..” in Arabic the word is ‘daraba’ which the Pickthall koran translates as “SCOURGE them

                            JUST HOW CAN Point 4 above from sura 4/34 EVER BE a “benefit to humanity”???

                            Going by these koran verses ALONE and the criteria of “benefitting humanity” THE KORAN HAS FAILED MISERABLY AND horribly – It can never be of ANY benefit whatsoever, let alone any blessing to any one in the world.

                            KINDLY ANSWER The Questions posed to you above, Siam?




                            Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                            And so, after nearly a month of silence and ignorance our "friend" siam has disappeared and refused to address any of our questions posed above.

                            I suspect he / she is incapable and unable to answer them. Also proving that it was only for muslim missionary activity that he made all his posts.

                            what a shame!

                            Comment



                            • Actually it is not only the divine source of the Quran that is dubious and hence, questionable. When it was allegedly "received here" (piecemeal) on earth, there were even bigger problems which the primitive & early muslims admitted to and tried to resolve on their own plane!

                              Ibn Khaldun the orthodox muslim scholar, in his celebrated work "Muqadimmah", admitted to major issues of language and orthography which throws the Quran into grace doubt and unreliability.

                              Here, ibn Khaldun comments on the incompetence of the Arabic scribes and tge relationship to muhammad islam's "prophet"-

                              "Arabic writing at the beginning of Islam was, therefore, not of the best quality nor of the greatest accuracy and excellence. It was not (even) of medium quality, because the Arabs possessed the savage desert attitude and were not familiar with crafts.

                              "One may compare what happened to the orthography of the Qur'an on account of this situation. The men around Muhammad wrote the Qur'an in their own script which was not of a firmly established, good quality. Most of the letters were in contradiction to the orthography required by persons versed in the craft of writing…

                              "Consequently, the Qur'anic orthography of the men around Muhammad was followed and became established, and the scholars acquainted with it have called attention to passages where (this is noticeable).

                              "No attention should be paid in this connection with those incompetent (scholars) that the men around Muhammad knew well the art of writing and that the alleged discrepancies between their writing and the principles of orthography are not discrepancies, as has been alleged, but have a reason. For instance, they explain the addition of the alif in la 'adhbahannahU 'I shall indeed slaughter him' as indication that the slaughtering did not take place (lA 'adhbahannahU).


                              The addition of the ya in bi-ayydin 'with hands (power),' they explain as an indication that the divine power is perfect. There are similar things based on nothing but purely arbitrary assumptions. The only reason that caused them to assume such things is their belief that their explanations would free the men around Muhammad from the suspicion of deficiency, in the sense that they were not able to write well. They think that good writing is perfection. Thus, they do not admit the fact that the men around Muhammad were deficient in writing."

                              (Muqqadimah, Ibn Khaldun, vol. 2, p.382)

                              Comment


                              • Even the well known Muslim intellectuals and researchers into “Koranic preservation” admit such a claim is rather impossible to prove factually and that “the standard narrative has holes in it.”

                                This is the narrative of proper and ''perfect Koranic preservation.'' Which then turns out finally into a myth.

                                Dr. Yasir Qadhi of Houston Texas, himself admits in his lectures that the Koran’s qiraats and ahruf have differences, not only in readings (recitings) but also in whole letters and words.

                                Dr. Shady Hekmat Nasser is more straightforward in his lecture and admits that the readings / qiraats have different VOCABULARY, sentences, words structure and recitings. Such different vocabulary and words only mean differences in meanings in the same verses & passages.

                                He also disclosed that during one of the stages of Koranic canonization, seven qiraats / styles were chosen arbitrarily from 40-50 different ones by ibn Mujahid in 936 A.D.

                                Then, over 490 years later in 1429 AD, another three qiraats were further taken from the remaining unchosen styles by ibn al-Jazari who conducted the Koran’s third canonization. Making a total of TEN different qiraats/readings. Which one(s) of the above cherry-picked ones is/are actually, the authentic & original Koran “sent down to Muhamed”??

                                Why were seven, and then ten chosen over the fifty pre-existing DIFFERENT readings & qiraats? Did ANY of these 2 canonizers follow a divine order or authenticated guidelines to select these 7, then 10 variant qiraats over the OTHER 40-plus to ensure real originality? What’s so special of these 10+ selected qiraat over the other 30-40 qiraat that did NOT get chosen?

                                These points were brought to public attention by Dr.Shady Hekmat Nasser, a Muslim scholar at Harvard and NOT by a westener, non-muslim "kafir" or infidel in Muslims' eyes!



                                Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                                Actually it is not only the divine source of the Quran that is dubious and hence, questionable. When it was allegedly "received here" (piecemeal) on earth, there were even bigger problems which the primitive & early muslims admitted to and tried to resolve on their own plane!

                                Ibn Khaldun the orthodox muslim scholar, in his celebrated work "Muqadimmah", admitted to major issues of language and orthography which throws the Quran into grace doubt and unreliability.

                                Here, ibn Khaldun comments on the incompetence of the Arabic scribes and tge relationship to muhammad islam's "prophet"-

                                "Arabic writing at the beginning of Islam was, therefore, not of the best quality nor of the greatest accuracy and excellence. It was not (even) of medium quality, because the Arabs possessed the savage desert attitude and were not familiar with crafts.

                                "One may compare what happened to the orthography of the Qur'an on account of this situation. The men around Muhammad wrote the Qur'an in their own script which was not of a firmly established, good quality. Most of the letters were in contradiction to the orthography required by persons versed in the craft of writing…

                                "Consequently, the Qur'anic orthography of the men around Muhammad was followed and became established, and the scholars acquainted with it have called attention to passages where (this is noticeable).

                                "No attention should be paid in this connection with those incompetent (scholars) that the men around Muhammad knew well the art of writing and that the alleged discrepancies between their writing and the principles of orthography are not discrepancies, as has been alleged, but have a reason. For instance, they explain the addition of the alif in la 'adhbahannahU 'I shall indeed slaughter him' as indication that the slaughtering did not take place (lA 'adhbahannahU).


                                The addition of the ya in bi-ayydin 'with hands (power),' they explain as an indication that the divine power is perfect. There are similar things based on nothing but purely arbitrary assumptions. The only reason that caused them to assume such things is their belief that their explanations would free the men around Muhammad from the suspicion of deficiency, in the sense that they were not able to write well. They think that good writing is perfection. Thus, they do not admit the fact that the men around Muhammad were deficient in writing."

                                (Muqqadimah, Ibn Khaldun, vol. 2, p.382)

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by dida_jabal, 07-09-2021, 05:16 PM
                                22 responses
                                144 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Dan Zebiri  
                                Started by Trucker, 10-23-2020, 10:09 AM
                                79 responses
                                594 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Dan Zebiri  
                                Started by Dan Zebiri, 03-30-2019, 04:15 AM
                                135 responses
                                18,842 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Dan Zebiri  
                                Working...
                                X