The Bible teaches No Scripture is of private interpretation. First, and most importantly, notice that the quote had wantof (lackof, e.g. Fourth, both were written on extremely expensive and durable calfskin. Brooke Foss Westcott (1825 1901) Christian Publishing House Blog, Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828 1892) Christian Publishing House Blog, CHOOSING THE BEST BIBLE TRANSLATION JUST GOT EASIER! Revision of the King James Version. serve us and God well in what they provide. They do not even agree with each other. GW edition: NT:Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament27th edition. In the court room they tell it to the judge as it is, yet when the judge hears each of their stories, the witnesses do not agree. The KJV itself went through a number of revisions and the one we use today is usually the 1769 revision. Oct 30, 2011. This version has been dedicated to the Public Domain, Revision of the American Standard Version, The Beloved and I: New Jubilees Version of the Sacred Scriptures in Verse, Unofficial Catholic translation by layman Ronald L. Conte Jr., a self described theologian, which is in the public domain, Christian Community Bible, English version. John is married to Janet they have three grown up children and two grandogs. - "About" David Cloud It should also be noted that the writings of John W. Burgon, Edward Hills, Benjamin C. Wilkinson will be greatly edifying. (Westcott-Hort, Weiss, Tischendorf Greek texts), First English Bible with whole of Old Testament translated direct from Hebrew texts. (7) Which is inerrant the Latin Vulgate Erasmus used to make some of the Textus Receptus or the Byzantine texts? The debate in the link below between White and Moorman shows how the King James Version Only view simply doesnt stand up and has no intellectual credibility at all. Things we do not want copied and distributed freely are items like the Fundamental Baptist Digital Library, print editions of our books, electronic editions of the books that we sell, the videos that we sell, etc. (13) What do you do with the fact that the KJV has 1,000 different words that do not mean today what they meant in 1611, even having the opposite meaning? It is also known as the Westcott and Hort text, after its editors Brooke Foss Westcott (18251901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (18281892). . We trust that your Christian honesty will preserve the integrity of this policy. 68 days ago. the KJV, it wasnt even the first (by a long way) of the English translations of the Bible. Throw away the bones.. Tanakh (Old Testament), Masoretic Text (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 1983), Textus Receptus, Maintains Jewish context of the entire Bible, using Hebrew names for God and Jesus, and translating Hebrew names of people and places. There are over 5366 manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. List Of Bible Trivia Questions And Answers. Otherwise, they would have worn out and disappeared through much reading.. Released into the public domain by The Work of Gods Children (nonprofit corporation). We do not have space nor the time to offer a full-scale argument against the King James Version Only and the Textus Receptus Only groups. Riplingers New Age Bible Versions, and Mr. Joseph Van Beeks tract, KJV vs NIV. 3) Hort wrote, The popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit. They are based on an eclectic text which sometimes favors the TR over Aleph or B.This is true as far as it goes, but it ignores the heart of the issue. They are NOTHING when we look at the nearly 6,000 differences, many being quite substantial between the Alexandrian Critical Text and the Textus Receptus. It is sometimes called the Textus Receptus. An extensive comparison of the TR against the WH text, the Nestles Text, the UBS text, and key English versions was done by the late Everett Fowler and can be found in his book Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, available from Bible for Today. Uses various methods, such as emphatic idiom and special diacritical marks, to bring out nuances of the underlying Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts. Pastor Tobin Pederson, Reformation Day, October 31, 2007. The fact is that the Westcott-Hort text represents the first widely-accepted departure from the Received Text in the post-Reformation era, and the modern English versions descend directly from the W-H text. To start with a doctrine and then correct or prefer a Bible translation because of it is, frankly, the wrong way around!! In textual criticism of the New Testament, the Alexandrian text-type is one of the main text types. We have nothing to fear from new manuscript discoveries and the advancement of linguistic knowledge. Westcott I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly. Riplinger, pg 622, Hort Evangelicals seem to me perverted. And the 1611 KJV translators said in the 1611 PREFACE that a new revision should be made upon such circumstances. Adds a new translation of the LXX to an existing translation of the NKJV in a single volume. The Work of Gods Children Illustrated Bible. This Bible version is now Public Domain worldwide due to copyright expiration except in the United Kingdom due to crown letters patent until 2039. [7] Westcott, B.F. (July 1893). We can conclude that any modern translation that uses majestic, literary or grand language is not generally reflecting the text and style of the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. For the reader of the NIV this note in brackets must at least cause doubt to enter ones mind as to the authenticity of these verses. I urge you not to do this. The World English Bible is based on the American Standard Version of the Holy Bible first published in 1901, the Biblia Hebraica Stutgartensa Old Testament, and the Greek Majority Text New Testament. How Reliable Are the Early Texts of the New Testament? They considered it quite decisive whenever these two manuscripts agreed, particularly when reinforced by other ancient uncial manuscripts. You are also welcome to use excerpts from the articles in your writings, in sermons, in church bulletins, etc. has caused great harm to the Christian Church; it confuses people. It is not surprising, therefore, that modern version proponents today often disassociate themselves from Westcott-Hort and claim that they merely use an eclectic Greek text. For those books, C. D. Ginsburgs Hebrew text was used. text (Erwin Nestle and Kurt Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 24th edition, 1960, p. 62).James White is failing to acknowledge a fact that modern textual authorities such as Metzger, Colwell, and Nestle do acknowledge--that Westcott and Hort are key, pivotal men in the modern history of textual criticism and that the current eclectic Greek New Testaments continue to reflect, for the most part, the decisions made by Westcott and Hort. Who Wrote the Bible Book ________? one of them is of mainly later texts after the fall of Antioch and Alexandria to Islam. When voices started saying that the Gospel of John was a much later invention (as late as 200AD) we discovered papyrus fragment p.52 dated at probably 115AD from almost as soon as the ink was dry on the original!! If they had been good manuscripts, they would have been read to pieces long ago. This was an early Catholic attempt to translate the Bible into English from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages instead of from the Latin Vulgate. I once saw a Christian rant and rave to some Jehovahs Witnesses and he quoted 1 John 5:7, 1 Tim 3:16 and said the KJV was the true Word of God, it was embarrassing and it reinforced the Witnesses in their faith. Almost all the websites, articles, films, videos and messages I have come across regarding the KJV, pay no attention at all to this viewpoint as they. You could say that Over five thousand witnesses agree, this New Testament is Gods holy Word. Other translations such as the New Revised Standard Version, New English Bible, Contemporary English Version and Jerusalem Bible also include Evangelical, Bible-believing scholars and many others all of whom have the highest academic credibility. () In many instances where I would disagree with the wording in the Nestle / UBS text in favor of a particular variant reading, I would later check with the Westcott and Hort text and realize that they had often come to the same decision. The Hebraic Roots Version Scriptures is a translation of the Tanakh/Old Testament from the Hebrew Masoretic Text. If you have any questions, please review our Privacy Policy or email us at privacy@biblegateway.com. The Response to the Appeal. Jehovahs Witness Discussion Techniques: How to Meet Them. for value), not counted. gain access to 50+ premium resources to enhance your study of Scripture. They are anything but. also include Evangelical, Bible-believing scholars and many others all of whom have the highest academic credibility. It goes without saying that no Bible-believing Christian who is willing to extend the implications of his faith to textual matters can have the slightest grounds for confidence in contemporary critical texts (emphasis added) (Zane C. Hodges, Rationalism and Contemporary New Testament Textual Criticism, Bibliotheca Sacra, January 1971, p. 35). This combination of claim and quote comes from the July/August 1993 issue of Battle Cry, the newspaper put out by Jack Chick. You can support this vital work so we can help us train Christians, equip churches, and reach the lost. The most radical within the fundamentalist movement are known as the King James Version Onlyist. There are a number of theories about text types and families which have some intellectual and academic credibility. As early as 1853 they began work on their Greek text of the New Testament: this project was . Greek which was the Greek of Alexander the Great, a common, or marketplace Greek. Similarly, Gail Riplinger writes Westcotts son writes of his fathers lifelong faith in what for lack of a better name, one must call Spiritualism. We dare not and must not ignore these things. The following brief comments are not meant to stand alone, please use the links that follow that will enlarge, reinforce, and add to the article. Vulgate, with influence from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. This translation in many ways was the . Any man who discounts the continuing significance of Westcott-Hort in the field of Bible texts and versions is probably trying to throw up a smoke screen to hide something. We suspect that these two manuscripts are indebted for their preservation, solely to their ascertained evil character . As the Christian message was . A concordance of every form of every Greek word was made and systematized and turned into English. It follows the edition ofSeligman Baerexcept for the books of Exodus to Deuteronomy, which never appeared in Baers edition. For example, the witness Codex Vatican B (one of the five), a Greek manuscript of the New As time progressed more and earlier manuscripts came to light which have helped us to hone the text of the New Testament so that today it stands without equal among the works of antiquity in the number of witnesses and quality of its manuscript evidence. The judge then listens to the other side which holds over 5000 witnesses. Almost all the websites, articles, films, videos and messages I have come across regarding the KJV, or anti modern versions, pay no attention at all to this viewpoint as they seem more concerned about showing that a translation 400 years old is in some way better than the ones we have today. (3) How many textual errors (differences) are in the handful of Byzantine manuscripts used to make the Textus Receptus, which is behind the KJV? A. Hort, upon whose text the United Bible Society is based, which is the foundation for all modern-day translations of the Bible. 118:8 Putting our confidence in God and not man, it seems apparent our Lord has kept His promise and that His Word is faithfully preserved in over 5000 witnesses! But, except for three or four editors who timidly corrected some of the more blatant errors of the Textus Receptus, this debased form of the New Testament text was reprinted in edition after edition. The links below give us plenty of information to add detail to my brief comments. (1) If Gods Word is only found in the 1611 KJV, where was Gods Word from 100 A.D. 1610 A.D.? Revision of the King James Version, but with acriticalNew Testament text: Westcott and Hort 1881 and Tregelles 1857. The maxims which they enunciated on questions of the text are of such importance. (Souter 1913, 118) They took all imaginable factors into consideration in laboring to resolve the difficulties that conflicting texts presented, and when two readings had equal weight, they indicated that in their text. The Old Testament translation is based on the Hebrew Masoretic text. The Westcott-Hort Greek text is very significant and its editors are highly significant to the history of textual criticism. For less than $5/mo. Things that we encourage you to share include the audio sermons, O Timothy magazine, FBIS articles, and the free eVideos and free eBooks. Translations are not based on the previous translation and revised, which is the claim of Mormons for instance, they are based on the manuscripts available, this is an important point to understand. Modern English (GW) & Early Modern English (KJV). . The KJV translators only had fewer than 12 manuscripts of the NT in Greek to work with. Goal:Distributed by Way of Life Literature Inc., the Fundamental Baptist Information Service is an e-mail posting for Bible-believing Christians. Again, they need not pull quotes from when Westcott and Hort were young men but rather show one unorthodox belief in their commentaries, which have been listed below. Therefore it is unwise for the sincere Christian to readily accept modern Bible translations assuming them to be accurate and faithful to the Word of God. _______________________________________________. (Eclectic means to select or employ individual elements from a variety of sources, systems, or styles.). [The personal letters of Hort and Westcott sound like the letters of men of the Jesuit order (that is, if you know the Roman Catholic Jesuits. http://www.bible-researcher.com/kutilek1.html. I have never personally come across anyone that actually believes it, but some scholars do. The quote above still appears on Chicks website at the time of this writing. Comparable to the English Standard Versionand the New American Standard Bible. : Were Westcott and Hort Occultist Unbelievers? KJVO fundamentalists wont question John Calvins salvation http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/index_doug.html, A superb debate between two Bible teachers one defending the KJV chaired by Doug Harris, founder of Reachout, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwe_nxeVwE0. . It goes without saying that no Bible-believing Christian who is willing to extend the implications of his faith to textual matters can have the slightest grounds for confidence in contemporary critical texts (emphasis added) (Zane C. Hodges, Rationalism and Contemporary New Testament Textual Criticism, Bibliotheca Sacra, January 1971, p. 35).Zane Hodges is not a fundamental Baptist, but I believe he is more honest about the influence of Westcott and Hort upon modern textual scholarship than James White. I think the argument of no early byzantine readings is incorrect, using circular reasoning. I observe, then, that while spiritual ministries are constantly recorded in the Bible, there is not the faintest encouragement to seek them. Some of those who stand out the most are from the fundamentalists of the late 19th and the early 20th centuries. Since its publication in 1881, Westcott and Hort's work has proved to be impressively accurate, though far from perfect. During the eighteenth-century scholars assembled a great amount of information from many Greek manuscripts, as well as from versional and patristic witnesses. Naturally so because they were Greek textual scholars. There are various groupings of texts. Bible study and teaching is his passion. This is where WH come in, they compiled manuscripts , examined them and took note of the earliest and best of them and compiled a printed text, the Westcott & Hort text. I would venture to say that their doctrinal positions are not perfect, especially when they were younger because no one has perfect doctrinal positions. So here is the dilemma when it comes to the witness of the Greek manuscripts. The final conclusion here is simple, Westcott and Hort had some missteps spiritually as young men, they were not perfect as to their beliefs as young men, and they are under attack because they were the producers of the text that undermined the Textus Receptus that had been worshipped for centuries. In Christ Jesus our Lord, Patristic Quotations of the New Testament, Part 2 The Flood to the Deliverance From Egypt, Part 3-Deliverance From Egypt to Israels First King, Part 4 Israels First King to Captivity in Babylon, Part 5-Captivity in Babylon to the Completion of the Book of Malachi, Part 6-From Malachi to the Birth of Jesus, Part 8-Jesus Resurrection to death of the Apostle John. I no. KJV edition: OT:Masoretic Text, NT:Textus Receptus. Westcott and Hort relied heavily on what they called the neutral family of texts, which involved the renowned fourth-century vellum Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts. God help you. The Textus Receptus (Latin for "Received Text") is a Greek New Testament that provided the textual base for the vernacular translations of the Reformation Period. I suppose I am a communist by nature. Riplinger, pg 624, Westcott our Bible as well as our Faith is a mere compromise. Riplinger, pg 625. It is their position that the King James Version of the Bible is superior to all other English translations and that all English translations based on the Westcott and Hort text of 1881 (foundation text of UBS5 and NA28) are corrupt due to the influence of the Alexandrian Greek manuscripts. Even a brief comparison of passages between the NIV and KJV will yield useful information. However the majority of these manuscripts agree with each other almost perfectly. Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) was born at Birmingham and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) at Dublin. They also developed a theory of textual criticism which underlay their Greek NT and several other Greek NT since (such as . Many modern versions like the New International Version (450 million copies worldwide), English Standard Version, Holman Christian Standard Bible, New Living Translation, New Century Version, Amplified Bible, New English Translation and New American Standard Bible have been produced by the finest Bible believing scholars in the world. The word MANUSCRIPTS is used to describe these copies or parchments which still exist. This version is now in thepublic domaindue to copyright expiration. This Byzantine text is not the textus receptus, as it is thought to be by some, it is not the basis for the KJV, it doesnt include 1 John 5:7 or the end of Mark, but it is established by many manuscripts. How did the term Textus Receptus come about? That was my first introduction to B. F. Westcott (1825-1901) and F. J. Have you read my 644 page book: FROM SPOKEN WORDS TO SACRED TEXTS: Introduction-Intermediate New Testament Textual Studies, Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Free for All. The following is information is take from two sources, G.A. The 1881 British Revised Version (RV), also known as the English Revised Version (ERV) of the King James Version, and the 1881 New Testament Greek text of Westcott and Hort did not sit well with the King-James-Version-Only[3] advocate John William Burgon (18131888), E. H. A. Scrivener (18131891), and Edward Miller (18251901), the latter authoring A Guide to the Textual Criticismof the New Testament (1886). We know now that the Greek of the New Testament was common or koine Greek which was the Greek of Alexander the Great, a common, or marketplace Greek. Our primary goal with the FBIS is to provide material to assist preachers in the edification and protection of the churches. But in truth, the majority of anything does not automatically mean that it is the best or even correct. 3. To understand Westcott and Hort, you must first understand textual criticism. So, what was the New Testament Text before the 9th century when the Byzantine came to be the majority and up until that time the Alexandrian was the majority? At the age of 23, in late 1851, Hort . The Alexandrian text-type, exemplified in the Codex Ephraemi, exhibits a polished Greek style. Chapter 8: Westcott and Hort - part 1. (2.49-50). Riplinger, pg 625. Masoretic Text, Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (based on Westcott-Hort, Weiss and Tischendorf, 1862). HE DETHRONED THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS. in front of those who oppose historic Christianity, . They were known to be the chief architects of the critical theory which resulted in the revised Greek Testament which has replaced the Textus Receptus (TR) or Received Text. The majority of KJV only people believe that the Wescott and Hort exts are erroneous because they read a pamphlet from the pamphlet rack at church that said that it was. But HORT DID NOT FAIL TO REACH HIS MAJOR GOAL. In 1841 an old manuscript (Codex Vaticanus) was discovered lying on a shelf in the Vatican library. However we gain John 1:18 God the only Son; Titus 2:13 and 2 Pet 1:1 God and Saviour ( neither in KJV) and very nature God in Php 2:6. the KJV, it doesnt include 1 John 5:7 or the end of Mark, but it is established by many manuscripts. Likewise we dare never put confidence in man. Brooke FossWestcott(18251901) and Fenton John AnthonyHort(18281892) are mentioned regularly in relation to the Greek text of the NT. This Bible version is now Public Domain due to copyright expiration. It is a critical text (master Greek text of the NT seeking to ascertain the original Some things most people do not know about the KJV. Christian Publishing House Blog, Byzantine Text-Type of Greek New Testament Manuscripts Christian Publishing House Blog, Is the King James Version (KJV) the ONLY True Bible Translation? Comparable to theEnglish Standard Versionand theNew American Standard Bible. The consensus however is they favored the Aleph and B text more than the others. During the twentieth century, with the discovery of several New Testament manuscripts much older than any that had hitherto been available, it has become possible to produce editions of the New Testament that approximate ever more closely to what is regarded as the wording of the original documents.[5]. Setting Straight the Indefensible Defenders of the Textus Receptus. However, they were not thoughtlessly bound to the Vaticanus manuscript as some scholars have claimed, for by assessing all the elements they frequently concluded that certain minor interpolations had crept into the neutral text that was not found in the group more given to interpolations and paraphrasing, i.e. Revision of the Revised Standard Version. However, this material may be freely used for personal study or research purposes. Naturally so because they were Greek textual scholars. Masoretic Text, the GreekNew Testament of Erasmus, Vulgate, and German and Swiss-German Bibles (Luther Bible,Zrich BibleandLeo Juds Bible), First complete Bible printed in English (Early Modern English). For these, we're using KJV and NKJV as examples of Textus Receptus, and as a representative of Westcott-Hort, the NIV (and also the NASB or the New American Standard Bible). Textus Receptus. Horts success in this task and the cogency of his tightly reasoned theory shapedAND STILL SHAPESthe thinking of those who approach the textual criticism of the NT through the English language (emphasis added) (Ernest Cadman Colwell, Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Corruption of the Text, The Bible in Modern Scholarship, ed. Masoretic Text, the Greek New Testament of Erasmus, the Vulgate, the Luther Bible, and a 1535 bible from France. We dont even know what part of which text they used and where! A series of articles on relevant topics about the KJV and Greek text. Sharing Policy: [5] Bruce Manning Metzger, United Bible Societies, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament (4th Rev. 2) They denied the Genesis account of creation and questioned whether Eden ever existedInstead they praised Darwins 1859 theory of evolution. It is generally believed that these were from the 50 that Eusebius prepared for Constantine. In other words, the manuscript Codex Vatican B does not contain Mark 16:9-20. Masoretic Text, Greek New Testament of Erasmus, the Vulgate, and theLuther Bible. Revision of theChalloner Revisionof theDouay-Rheims Bible. And what do we know about these men who made themselves the judges over Gods holy Word? Of course, I think they gave too much weight to Codex Vaticanus alone, and this needs to be tempered. Westcott and Hort began their work in 1853 and finished it in 1881, working . INDIANA BIBLE COLLEGE | INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA, Modern Bible Versions, and Westcott and Hort From the eighth century forward, the corrupt Byzantine text was the standard text and had displaced all others; it makes up about 95 percent of all manuscripts that we have of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Thus, the idea of true believers wearing out manuscripts is ludicrous. Almost all of the Bible translations since the late 19th century - for. I mean, a text issued by men who are already known for what will undoubtedly be treated as dangerous heresy will have great difficulty in finding its way to regions which it might otherwise hope to reach and whence it would not be easily banished by subsequent alarms. What Can We Do to Establish Faith In the Restored Text of the New Testament? It was the corrupt Byzantine form of text that provided the basis for almost all translations of the New Testament into modern languages down to the nineteenth century. They are the judges as to what belongs in the Bible and what does not. All editions of Nestle-Aland remain close in textual character to the text WH. Horts success in this task and the cogency of his tightly reasoned theory shapedAND STILL SHAPESthe thinking of those who approach the textual criticism of the NT through the English language (emphasis added) (Ernest Cadman Colwell, Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Corruption of the Text, The Bible in Modern Scholarship, ed. Read online Bible study, search parallel bibles, cross reference verses, compare translations & post comments in bible commentaries at qBible.com. In his excellent history of the KJV, Gordon Campbell points out that the Geneva Bible, which preceded the KJV was used long after the KJV had been published by such notaries as Lancelot Andrewes, Richard Hooker, John Whitgift, and William Laud (. They will leave discussions with us knowing we will not face up to the facts available in the manuscripts. Instead they used the corrupted manuscripts of the Gnosticism-Origen-Eusebius- Jerome-Augustine lineage. (Joseph Van Beeks tract: KJV vs NIV, pgs 5 & 6), As to the personal beliefs of Westcot and Hort: 1) They never claimed or testified that the Bible was verbally inspired or inerrant. References in parentheses are to sections of HortsIntroduction, from which the principles have been extracted. Westcott and Hort believed the Greek text which underlies the KJV was perverse and corrupt. [5] In this they followed one of the primary principles of their fledgling textual criticism, lectio brevior, sometimes taken to an extreme, as in the theory of Western non-interpolations, which has since been rejected. In 1981 Metzger said: The international committee that produced the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, not only adopted the Westcott and Hort edition as its basic text, but followed their methodology in giving attention to both external and internal consideration. We know now that the Greek of the New Testament was common or. Westcott and Hort were spiritualists. OT:Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. In short, the Westcott and Hort theory states that the Bible is to be treated as any other book would be. It wasonly in the first part of the nineteenth century (1831) that a German classical scholar, Karl Lachmann, ventured to apply to the New Testament the criteria that he had used in editing texts of the classics. Brother Cloud lives in South Asia where he has been a church planting missionary since 1979. After the flurry of translations leading up to the King James Version (when many translations were produced such as Wycliffes, Tyndales, Coverdales, The Bishops Bible, The Geneva Bible etc), a steady trickle of translations continued. In one sense it matters not. They sought out contact with the spiritual world (talking with the dead, etc.). In my own NIV Student Bible (Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids Michigan, Copyright 1986, 1992), there is no mention of Westcott and Hort, but a mere reference to textual criticism., Where existing manuscripts differ, the translators made their choice of readings according to accepted principles of New Testament textual criticism., Though these quotations say nothing of Westcott and Hort, they are hidden behind the words accepted principles of textual criticism. They have dedicated themselves to learn Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, they have studied for decades the available manuscripts and have produced these translations as the fruit of their learning. Readers of these new Bibles are quite unaware that they are reading the translation of a corrupt text. He picks and chooses what belongs in the Bible and what doesnt, based upon his education, beliefs, and ideals. The King James Bible translation is based on the Greek text found in the Textus Receptus. No Christian truth is affected by any of the variations of translation due to textual differences.
Overseas Screening Disqualifications Air Force,
Our Lady Of Tepeyac Church Chicago Shameless,
Brewster Oyster Farms,
Articles W
