| Date: 2006-05-28 |
Username: william |
Helpful: 2 of 3 |
| What about the identity of the Beloved Disciple? |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
  |
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-06-25 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 1 of 1 |
| Hi William. The identity of the BD (beloved disciple) is still a much debated issue. We prefer to choose topics about which there is a clear weight of evidence. Needless to say, from some of the comments, there is no unanimity about even these 19 topics, yet there is sooo much evidence that it's safe to proceed. The BD's identity is still shrouded. Personally my candidate is Lazarus, but I am quite prepared to accept other names, including Mary Magdalene. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-07-27 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Hi Anne. Good suggestion. Personally I believe that Jesus served for awhile as a disciple of John, but I'm not sure there's a good body of evidence out there to support this belief. Can you suggest some passages that support this idea? |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-10 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 2 of 2 |
| Hi Andres. Good topic. I'm not so sure that there is "evidence" to explain the healings/miracles, as much as there are alternative views (e.g., Morton Smith's book on Jesus the Magician). I cover this issue in my book Jesus Who? which ios available at http://www.jesuswho.net In fact, all the topics here originally came from the book, and then have been revised and updated over time. PS - We plan to add another 10 topics before the end of the year, so please continue to offer suggestions. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-13 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 2 of 2 |
| Hi Andres. I like the idea and I think the "error" would be "Jesus was an original concept". I cover a lot of this in my book Jesus Who? and this material is discussed at the JesusMysteries Yahoo discussion group, both of which are listed on my Links page. In addition, S Acharya has a yahoo discussion group called Superconsciousness which theoretically is devoted to such issues, but which ends up discussing all sorts of things. We'll definitely have this as one of the next 10 errors to be listed. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-15 |
Username: GeoffreyTransom |
Helpful: 4 of 4 |
| Hi drj.
Topic Suggestion: Jesus was a Pacifist.
I'm thinking here of three bits in particular:
Matthew 10:34 - "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
and
Mark 14:47 - "And one of them that stood by drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear." (that is supposed to have been Simon Peter - the ignorant but loyal 'minder' who had no ear for parables but obvioulsy a decent temper)
and
Luke 22:36 "Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
So this bloke would rather that his men be naked and armed, than clothed and unarmed. Prince of Peace?
Also, Josephus tells a story about someone called Jesus whose band of brigands slaughtered a bunch of Greeks. (Joshua was a common name though).
Cheers,
GT
France |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-15 |
Username: GeoffreyTransom |
Helpful: 2 of 3 |
| Another interesting thread of inquiry would be the links between Zoroastrianism, Buddhism and Confucianism... and the "Joshua Message".
Few people realise that Siddharta Gautama, Kung Tzu and Zoroaster were contemporaries (OK, maybe Zoroaster ied a little bit before Gautama started lazing around under Bodhi trees). Also, Persia sent trade delegations to both Cathay AND India - in the time when the Buddha was still alive (but Zoroaster had died and Kung Tzu was old).
So the whole "be reasonably nice to one another (when you're not selling your garment to buy a sword)" thing may not have been learned by being taught by Egyptians... maybe it was learned further East...
Cheers again,
GT France |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-17 |
Username: valy |
Helpful: 5 of 5 |
| What about the question of Jesus as the founder of Christianity as a "common error" ? Can't Paul of Tarsus be considered the true founder of Christianity ? |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-18 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Hi Geoff, The idea about Jesus being a pacifist is an excellent suggestion. There is debate on the issue on both sides, but there certainly is some evidence (as you offer) that he wasn't a complete peacenik. I'm not sure he was a militant Zealot either, but the idea that he was an unconditional pacifist is incorrect. That will definitely be on the list. Your other idea vis-a-vis the other religions is true, but I'm not sure how to phrase it. Perhaps it overlaps with the "Jesus was an original idea" concept which Andres suggested earlier. What do you think? |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-18 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Hi Valy. This may be the most important error of all, and among the vast majority of Christians, the most common error. Thanks. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-28 |
Username: factofgospel |
Helpful: 2 of 2 |
| Hello, the topic is about the silence of the bible on the life of JC between years from a teenager till he was 27 something, stories like he travelled to the Himalayas and had spiritual guidance from the sages residing there although no church agrees with this( which may be true as days go by the very history of JC seems to become more mythological than fact) but the question posed here is why the bible which has the events in the life of infant JC & adult "only son of god" JC is silent about the years in between with not even a passing reference. this being asked bcoz the bible claim as the word of god or if the so called diciples wrote it being inspired would they not have asked the great lord his various experiences through life fail to utter any instance of that particular period. the infant JC being of importance to the church to fulfill the jewish prophecy of immaneul, and adult JC being important to develop a new ideology with imperialistic designs and less spiritual. we can still see Islam & Christianity strive for that to date. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-08-29 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 3 of 3 |
| Hi FactsofGospel. An excellent addition. Will definitely put it on the list. BTW, here's the list of the next 10 errors to be covered -
• Jesus Was A Christian
• Jesus Approach Was Unique
• Jesus Was A Pacificist
• Jesus Performed Miracles
• Jesus Was The Son Of God
• Jesus Was The Suffering Servant
• Jesus Spent his Teenage Years in India
Of course, in the case of his teenage years we can't say that it's an error because it was possible. We simply don't know. I have quite a bit about that in my book Jesus Who? and I'll be happy to share that here. As with many of these issues, it's a question of probabilities. I have been in a recent debate about Jesus being beaten severely, and the point I have been making in that debate is that there is no evidence for the severeity of the beating. Now that being said, was it possible, even in the light of no evidence, that he was "severely" beaten. Yes, of course it's possible. But in this case as in the Teenage India case we will have to look at the weight of the evidence. Thanks for your suggestion. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-09-23 |
Username: DanUnterbrink |
Helpful: 4 of 5 |
| I have written two books which tell a new tale concerning Jesus of Nazareth. The first book, "Judas the Galilean", explores the similarities between Jesus and another first-century rabbi, Judas the Galilean. Both men cleansed the Temple in Jerusalem, were involved in a Barabbas-style prisoner release, were proclaimed Messiah in Galilee, and both founded new philosophies. The Jewish historian, Josephus, wrote extensively about the life of Judas the Galilean but did not mention the cause or date of Judas' death. On the other hand, Josephus did not describe one action of Jesus but did tell of Jesus' crucifixion at the hands of Pilate. Many scholars doubt the reliability of the "Jesus" passage in Josephus. I believe this "Jesus" passage was a substitution for the death of Judas the Galilean. Judas the Galilean founded the fourth philosophy (later known as the Zealots), and was always on the mind of Josephus. Josephus recorded the crucifixions of two of Judas' sons (45-47 AD), the stoning of another son, Menahem, who marched on Jerusalem ala Jesus in 66 AD, and the suicide of a grandson, Eleazar, at Masada in 73 AD. It is incomprehensible that Josephus would have forgotten to tell of Judas the Galilean's death. It is my contention that Jesus was simply a title for Judas the Galilean, and that the early church tried to distance Jesus from his true past.
The second book, "New Testament Lies", covers much of the same material as "Judas the Galilean", with one exception: "New Testament Lies" incorporates the Slavonic Josephus. Scholars have ignored the Slavonic Josephus for two reasons. First, a comprehensive comparison of the Slavonic version of the "War" with the Greek version was not published until 2003. Second, many items within the Slavonic "War" are not consistent with Traditional Christianity. The Slavonic Josephus includes "the star of Bethlehem" infant narrative but dates the story at 25 BC, a full generation before the date as calculated in Matthew. There are three passages about John the Baptist which go against the conventional Gospel accounts. First, John came baptizing at the river Jordan in 6 AD, immediately before the tax revolt against Rome, led by Judas the Galilean. (Note that Jesus was crucified for his refusal to pay taxes to Rome.) This John also preached the same philosophy as practiced by Judas. In short, according to the Slavonic Josephus, John the Baptist was a disciple of Judas the Galilean. The two other passages concerning John place John's death at 36 AD, several years after the Gospel death of Jesus. This is confirmed by Josephus' "Antiquities". Obviously, the Gospel timeline of John the Baptist was shifted in order to hide John's connection with Judas the Galilean. The Slavonic Josephus also disproves the stories of Judas Iscariot and Barabbas. According to this source, the High Priests paid Pilate 30 talents to arrest Jesus, and it was Jesus who was released to the crowd, not Barabbas (Judas the Galilean was released to the Jewish crowd in 4 BC by the son of Herod the Great, Archelaus.)
This is a very complicated subject, in that all of Christianity is turned upside down. With this earlier timeline for Jesus, it is now possible to compare the early church to the writings of Josephus. The result is unsettling. The hero of Traditional Christianity, Paul, becomes the traitor as depicted by Josephus and other early writings. The introduction of Judas Iscariot by the Gospel writers was just an attempt to shift blame from Paul to a Jewish Apostle. This whole cover-up is detailed in both books. What is at stake? The future of Christianity is at stake.
The following material should be noted:
1. The birth narrative of Matthew concerning the star of Bethlehem and Herod is corroborated by the Slavonic Josephus. However, the Slavonic Josephus places the event in the early years of Herod, around 25 BC. This earlier date would be consistent with the birth of Judas the Galilean and would be in line with the birth date of James, the brother of Jesus.
2. In 4 BC, Judas and his co-teacher, Matthias, cleansed the Temple, tearing down Herod's symbol of fealty to Rome, the Golden Eagle. This was at the beginning of Judas' career. In the book of John, Jesus cleansed the Temple at the start of his ministry. In the other three Gospels, Jesus cleansed the Temple after entering Jerusalem as Messiah, at the end of his career. Although Josephus does not tell of Judas' death, he does relate the story of Judas' son, Menahem, who entered Jerusalem as Messiah and cleansed the Temple as a Messianic act. This no doubt was copied from the acts of his father, Judas.
3. Judas was captured by Herod after the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing. There he languished in prison until Herod died. To win support from the Jewish crowd, Herod's son, Archelaus, agreed to lower taxes and to release prisoners. The release of Judas was the inspiration for the Barabbas story. Barabbas and Judas were both revolutionaries who had created an uprising in Jerusalem. The Barabbas release could not have happened in the time of Pilate, as the Romans did not release revolutionaries; they crucified them. In addition, the Slavonic Josephus states that Jesus was released, not Barabbas.
4. Judas was crowned Messiah in Galilee (4-2 BC), just as the Gospels portray the ministry of Jesus. This ministry of Jesus was telescoped into 1-3 years by the Gospel writers. The ministry of Judas lasted from 4 BC to 19 AD or 22 years. This same telescoping of careers also applies to John the Baptist. The Gospels give John a ministry of 1-3 years while the Slavonic Josephus dates John from 6-36 AD, or 30 years.
5. According to the Slavonic Josephus, in 6 AD, a wild preacher came baptizing in the River Jordan. In description, this was none other than John the Baptist. This earlier version of John preached the philosophy of Judas (a nationalism based upon the rule of God), and also promised the coming of a great leader. Immediately after this, Josephus wrote about the tax revolt of Judas the Galilean. This tax revolt was the launching pad for Judas' nationwide campaign against Rome. The Gospel of Luke places John's ministry at 29 AD, before the public ministry of Jesus. (It should be noted that refusal to pay taxes to Rome was the main charge against Jesus.)
6. Judas the Galilean founded a new philosophy, termed the Fourth Philosophy by Josephus. (The other three philosophies were the Sadducees, the Pharisees and the Essenes.) Jesus was credited with the founding of Christianity. However, the Christianity of today was a product of Paul's teachings and not the Jewish preacher, Jesus.
7. Although it cannot be proved with certainty, Judas the Galilean was probably crucified by the Roman authorities. His political career would have earned him this punishment. Judas' two sons, James and Simon, were crucified by the Romans a generation later. When Jesus was crucified, he was placed between two robbers, a term used by Josephus to describe members of Judas the Galilean's Fourth Philosophy. In reality, Jesus was simply crucified along with two or more of his captured followers.
8. The history of the early church can be compared to the movement of Judas from 19-67 AD. One example will suffice. According to Josephus, a Simon was preaching exclusion of all non-Jews from the Temple. He was escorted to Caesarea by Roman guards to answer to Agrippa in 43 AD. The writer of Acts took this historical event and placed it into Chapter 10. Simon Peter was escorted to Caesarea to meet Cornelius, a Roman Centurion. There, Simon Peter decided that Cornelius, a Gentile, should be included into the Christian fold. The author of Acts turned an exclusionary teaching into an act of inclusion.
This list can be expanded, but the above should show that the relationship between Judas the Galilean and his movement was incredibly similar to Jesus and the early church. This relationship has never been adequately explored before. It would be very interesting to hear Christian church leaders and leading scholars answer the above "coincidences." If nothing else, this could spur more research into these many similarities.
If you have any questions concerning this hypothesis, please do not hesitate to call or e-mail me. Thank you for your time.
Daniel T Unterbrink
329 N. Sandusky St.
Delaware, Ohio 43015
(740) 363-9568
unterbrink2@aol.com |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-09-23 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 3 of 3 |
| Hi Dan. Thanks for an interesting post. If I may, let me offer a few comments: (1) It's not really clear that Josephus ever said anything about Jesus, and certainly didn't mention his crucifixion. Every scholar I've read agrees that references to the crucifixion are a late addition. (2) The Slavonic Josephus has a questionable historicity, which doesn't mean that parts are not true, but it's difficult to build a theory around it because of its questionable repute. (3) John the Baptist'd death has always been confused with Jesus' death. See the article about Jesus dying in 30 AD for more information about this. From the evidence, it appears that John died in 35 AD and Jesus in 36 AD. (4) The so-called holiday release of a Jewish prisoner (Barabbas) has been de-bunked by almost every scholar who has ever explored the issue. (5) According to the gospels, before the Jewish authorities he was accused of blasphemy by claiming to be the Son of God (Luke 22:71), and before Pilate he was accused of “…perverting our nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ a king (Luke 23:3).” |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-09-24 |
Username: DanUnterbrink |
Helpful: 1 of 2 |
| Hello drj,
I agree that the Barabbas story has been questioned by most scholars. I also believe that such an event did not occur under Pilate (30-36 AD). According to Josephus, there was a prisoner release in 4 BC by Archelaus, the son of Herod the Great. To gain support from the Jewish mob, Archelaus agreed to release prisoners and to lower taxes. This occurred after there was a insurrection in the city (the Golden Eagle Temple Cleansing). The prisoner release was recorded in both Antiquities and in the War. In addition, the Slavonic Josephus claims that Jesus was released, not Barabbas. In short, there was an historical event which served as the basis of the Barabbas story. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-09-24 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Hi Dan. I believe Pilates reign was from 26 to 36, not 30 to 36. Also I believe that in Antiquities Book 17 Josephus says that Archelaus considered the release but didn't actually follow through. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-09-25 |
Username: DanUnterbrink |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Hi drj,
I agree with you that Archelaus never lowered the taxes as he promised. But the release of prisoners could have been done immediately and would have proven his sincerity. A few passages later, Archelaus actually dismissed the High Priest because of the crowd. Giddy with success, the crowd kept pushing for more. The result was a massacre. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-10-06 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 1 of 1 |
| Hi Dr Ball. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I was involved in solving some problems with people hacking into the comments section to place ads. Anyhow, there's lots of allusions to Jesus being hung from a tree rather than being crucified. In The Acts of the Apostles, Paul says: “The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus whom you had killed by hanging [kremannumi] him on a tree (5:30) .” He repeats this account two more times (10:39, 13:29). The word used for “tree” is “xulon” which refers to a living tree, rather than a post or stake. Galatians says: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us - for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree' (3:13).” 1 Peter (2:24) says: “He himself carried up our sins in his body to the tree…” The Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians says: “Jesus Christ, who bore our sins in his own body on the tree…(v. 8).” etc. These are but a few. I list many more in my book Jesus Who?. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-10-23 |
Username: andre |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Did Jesus sin? |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-10-25 |
Username: drj |
Helpful: 1 of 1 |
| Hi Andre. Thanks for the comment. It's a good one. We've started adding the new topics. Two are there so far: Mary of Magdala and The empty tomb. With regard to your question, can you be more specific. Did you have something in mind? Are you referring to his need for baptism? Or the purification when he's born? Or both? Or something else? BTW, if you'd like you can draft a comment and if it looks good I'll use it with an attribution to you. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2006-10-25 |
Username: GeoffreyTransom |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Hi again DrJ.
Sorry to have taken so long to respond, but I have been busy (moving house - to the 18th century tower of a 15th century chateau in the Loire... pics at http://marketrant.blogspot.com/2006/09/nonrant-plus-change.html ).
Back to the point - the whole "non-pacifist" thing.
I think it's pretty clear that apart from exhorting his chums to get swords and so on, he also displayed quite a malicious nature (we Australians would say "he had a bit of the mongrel in him"). The whole "Listen to me or burn in hell for eternity with the gnashing of teeth and what-not" gig (the quotes are not meant to imply that this is a verbatim citation)... not terribly consistent with being the "Prince of Peace".
One thing about folks who are right and who know that they are (as one might if one was God incarnate) is that you don't have to be smug or ornery. You could be literally Ghandi-esque (without the loincloth and glasses) or Buddha-esque about the thing.
To my way of thinking, only circus hucksters and stage magicians (and the Bush regime) need to resort to fear-mongering, hectoring and bullying in order to get people to join up. Getting people to abandon their families is a little too "cult-like" for my liking.
Cheers,
GT. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2007-02-05 |
Username: glass |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| how about a topic that looks at John the Baptist?
could this include the possibility of a connection to the exilic community of Ezekiel in Babylonia, for example? and does it play upon the placing as High Priest by Herod of a person named Ananelus (Johanan? or an equivalent perhaps) in Josephus' antiquities? (i apologize for not having the citation at hand, but an index should point you to the page number).
and, chronologically, if this does not work out to having been THE john the baptist of the Gospels, could it have been an earlier family member?
also, reading about the Mandaeans has whetted my curiosity immensely. as a 'gnostic' sect, how akin are they to Nag Hamadi gnostics (in the proper sense of the term :) ?).
this connection might explain the later, post 70 (or 73) uprisings under Trajan and Hadrian, in the years roughly 106 and again, under BarKochba (son of the star) in 135, and the widespread warfare from euphrates to cyrene (libya), including alexandria in egypt as well.
|
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2007-02-28 |
Username: rabbiray1 |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Did Yeshuah follow all Jewish (Old Testament) ways? And if so then he must have known the Laws of Marriage where a Jewish Male must be Married before he can take on any authority |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2007-08-07 |
Username: TOTO |
Helpful: 0 of 1 |
| Dear Friends
As long as we talk about these Myths we are helping the Church Ltd Co
Please let me give you an example:
(A) says cola drinks are good for the health
(B) says cola drinks are unhealthy
Start a debate in the newspapers and in the magazines and you will see that the sales of the cola drinks will rise
The only thing we have to promote is the following:
GET OUT OF THIS SHOP AND DONT PAY THEM ANYTHING
They are only based on money and there is no other way to dry their roots |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2007-09-13 |
Username: rambux |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Could we explore some of the latest research concerning Judas? There's some really interesting material going around about how the Church has blackened his name, how it was all really pre-arranged between him and Jesus (a fairly strong lielihood, in my opinion), and so on. |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2007-09-24 |
Username: rambux |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| In response to michael's question: Jesus' use of "Son of Man" to refer to himself seems to be a reference to "Son of Man" refered to in Daniel (the incident where 3 Jews were thrown into the fiery furnace). It seems to be a somewhat obscure term, but if we take the Daniel reference seriously, it seems as though Jesus is modelling himself on some kind of character who comes to the aid of the faithful in times of great need.
As for TOTO's remark, it seems as though he reveals himself to be totally biased and anti-religion (of any sort). That's his choice of course, but his remarks scarcely make any attempt to be objective and rational, one of the stated aims of this site.
|
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2008-04-24 |
Username: rambux |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| To the very first question: Andreas - the identity of the 'Beloved Disciple'. For centuries, it was believed that the BL was John the Apostle, a thought first written by Irenaeus in 193 AD. This is almost certainly false, and it is now almost universally agreed amongst scholars that the BL was not one of the 12. For a detailed discussion on this subject, and the community out of which the 4th gospel grew (the 'Johannine' Community), see Raymond Brown, The Community Of The Beloved Disciple |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2008-05-28 |
Username: Linnie |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Hi Dan, I'm reading your book Judas the Galilean and enjoying it. Something occurred to me which I thought to mention to you. You pointed out that the names Judas and Mathias (and its spelling variations) appear to be linked, with Judas possibly being the son of Mathias, who was crucified after the Golden Eagle debacle. Since the two names were probably closely associated in the popular mind, it could be significant that the first book of the Synoptic Gospels is attributed to a Matthew - perhaps unintentionally giving away Judas/Jesus' close relationship with Mathias. Not only that, but the description of Matthew as an actual tax collector might be seen as a deliberate effort to distance Judas/Jesus from his probably well-established reputation as an anti-tax campaigner (who likely would have hated tax collectors) - inadvertently revealing thereby the importance of the tax issue to Judas/Jesus' mission, something which is glossed over in the New Testament. Also, and as I believe drj pointed out elsewhere, Matthew was the most 'Jewish' of the gospels - therefore the placement of Matthew as the first of the Synoptic Gospels lends further credence to your hypothesis that Judas/Jesus' mission was a much more 'Jewish Christian' movement than generally depicted.
I apologise if you bring any of these points up later in your book.. I'm still only on the 5th chapter! Regards.
|
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
| Date: 2008-07-10 |
Username: ancientofdays33 |
Helpful: 0 of 0 |
| Did Jesus install Peter as Pope? |
| Was this comment helpful to you? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
