Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 
Top Members

Was the flood at the time of Prophet Nuh A.s Global or local?

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
super-glue, abu mohammed
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
89
Brother
35
#1 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 11:17
Aoa.

I have found conflicting evidence to this.


Evidence pertaining to world wide flood

Quote:

Taken from Islamqa.org
Does it say in the holy Quran whether the flood that affected Noah and his family was a worldwide or local one? Did it affect the whole world or only the village where Nuh(as) and his family lived.
Answer

1. The floods encompassed the whole world. (Tafseer Mazhari vol.6 pg.40)
2. Allah Ta’ala ordered Nooh to take onto the ship those useful to man. Nooh
(Alayhis salaam) excluded animals which live in water and earthly creatures.
(Bayaanul Qur’aan vol.1 pg.47; Hashiyatul Jamal; Tafseer Baghawi vol.2
pg.34). The first to enter was a parrot and the last was a donkey.

and Allah Ta’ala Knows Best

Moulana Muhammad Hashim
FATWA DEPT.


Quote:
‘Ali ibn Abi Talhah narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas: There was no one left except the progeny of Nooh (peace be upon him).

Qataadah said concerning the words “And, his progeny, them We made the survivors”: All people are among the progeny of Nooh (peace be upon him).

Tafseer al-Qur’an al-‘Azeem by Ibn Katheer, 7/22


Quote:
The following is presented in Ibn Katheer's Tafseer about the words of Allaah (which mean):
And it sailed with them through waves like mountains...
[Quran 11:42] : “This means that the ship sailed with them on the surface of the water, which had completely covered the earth until it enveloped the mountain tops.”

Tafseer Al-Lubaab by An-Nu’maani reads: “The flood covered the entire earth from north to south and from east to west.”

The Stories of the Prophets by Ibn Katheer reads: “The flood covered the entire earth, from north to south and from east to west, its valleys and cliffs, its mountains, its deserts, and its sands, and everyone who was on the surface of the earth died without exception. As regards the eighty people who were with Nooh, they did not leave any progeny as Allaah says (what means):
And We made his descendants those remaining [on the earth].
[Quran 37:77]"

A group of scholars stated this; for instance, Ibn Katheer said: “It is related that ‘Ali ibn Abi Talhah related that Ibn ‘Abbas said: ‘It was only the offspring of Nooh that remained.’” Sa'eed ibn Abi ‘Aroobah said that Qataadah said: “All people are from the descendants of Nooh.” [End of quote]

At-Tabari said: “All the people – after the people of Nooh had been destroyed until today – are from the descendants of Nooh.” [End of quote]

Ibn Hajar may Allaah have mercy upon him said in Al-Fat-h: “After the flood, the people who remained were only the offspring of Nooh who was from the lineage of Sheeth; Allaah says (what means):
And We made his descendants those remaining [on the earth]
; and with him on the ship were eighty people, and they were those whom Allaah referred to in the saying (which means):
But none had believed with him, except a few.
[Quran 11:40] However, it was only the descendants of Nooh who remained, and they populated until they filled the earth.”

Mu‘jam Al-Buldaan (by Yaqoot al-Hamawi) 2/84 reads: “Thamaneen (eighty): A small town at Mount al-Joodi near the island of Ibn Umar At-Taghlabi above al-Mawsil city; the first person who settled in it was Nooh may Allaah exalt his mention when he went out of the ship and with him were eighty people. They built houses for them in that place and they dwelt in it, and so, the place was named after them. Then they were afflicted with an epidemic disease and the eighty people died whereas Nooh may Allaah exalt his mention and his children survived, so he is the father of all mankind.”



Evidence pertaining to local flood
Scholars Like Zakir Naik who interpret Quran in the light of science say "that Archaelogical evidence today tells us that it is impossible that whole earth was submerged. No where does the Quran say the full world was submerged under water. It speaks about Nuh (A.S) and his Qoum/people, a small group of people or may be a large group of people. Therefore Quran is matching with the Aracheological evidence of today."
There are many others who interpret a local flood for the Quran.


My questions:
1) If it was a local flood, why Allah سبحانه وتعالى commanded Nuh (A.S) to take pairs of Animals with him?
2)If it was a local flood , why Allah told Nuh (A.S) to build a boat when He could have told him to Migrate or do Hijrah to some other place like that happened at the time of Hazrat Lut (A.S).
3) Why would orthodox scholars interpret this to be a world wide flood if Quran wasn't specifying either?
4) Those who say it is Local say it on the grounds that Archaelogical evidence suggests that. Is that a valid methodology of approaching Quran and Hadith?
5)Those who say it is Local say it on the grounds that Nuh (A.S) was sent for a specific tribe or group and Only Prophet Mohammad (P.B.U.H) is send for the whole man kind and this would contradict Quran. What is the response to that?
6) Those who say it was local say it on the grounds that World wide flood contradicts Quran because Allah سبحانه وتعالى doesn't punish a nation until He sends a warner; therefore it is not possible that other nations would have drowned prior to recieving the warning. What is your response to this?

report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0Like x 2Creative x 1
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
20,794
Brother
6,918
abu mohammed's avatar
#2 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 13:42
Scientific evidence will also say that the Quran has been tampered with. Flawed evidence!
Scientific evidence will also say that it was impossible for the Prophet (saw) to pass the radiation belt. Flawed evidence
Today people believe there is evidence that man came from apes and we have so-called Imam's who also believe this :(

Nuh (as) was a warner to his people. And how do we know what the population was in his time or how the earth was shaped in his time? Or how they all lived? How do we know if there were no other Prophets in or around his time whose people also did not listen? Do we know if Nuh (as) travelled the world in his time? (Adam (as) covered a lot of land in his time)

Either way, Zakir Naik is stating that the Quran is NOT wrong. The Quran does not need to go into details. The fact that there was a flood remains. The Quran has not left space for errors. But man makes mistakes.

Also, Christians believe that God said that after this episode, He would not punish everyone for the crimes of others. Allahu Alum.

Finally, for Allah to wipe out all of mankind is nothing!
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
9,339
Brother
7,828
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#3 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 13:46

abu mohammed wrote:
View original post

 

There are even simpler answers to his questions.


report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Unspecified
745
Brother
500
#4 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 13:58
May be it was a local flood,and that in that time the entire human population was limited to that one particular area,that the humans were less in numbers and that they were not scattered in different geographical areas,as was the case later on...

After all in those days it was not easy for Bani Adam to travel to distant places and even more difficult to settle in different geographical localities.

Allah knows best
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Arfatzafar's avatar
Offline
India
1,258
Brother
1,484
Arfatzafar's avatar
#5 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:00
saa10245 wrote:
View original post

Quote:
Scholars Like Zakir Naik who interpret Quran in the light of science say "that Archaelogical evidence today tells us that it is impossible that whole earth was submerged. No where does the Quran say the full world was submerged under water. It speaks about Nuh (A.S) and his Qoum/people, a small group of people or may be a large group of people. Therefore Quran is matching with the Aracheological evidence of today."
There are many others who interpret a local flood for the Quran.

My questions:

1) If it was a local flood, why Allah سبحانه وتعالى commanded Nuh (A.S) to take pairs of Animals with him?
2)If it was a local flood , why Allah told Nuh (A.S) to build a boat when He could have told him to Migrate or do Hijrah to some other place like that happened at the time of Hazrat Lut (A.S).
3) Why would orthodox scholars interpret this to be a world wide flood if Quran wasn't specifying either?
4) Those who say it is Local say it on the grounds that Archaelogical evidence suggests that. Is that a valid methodology of approaching Quran and Hadith?
5)Those who say it is Local say it on the grounds that Nuh (A.S) was sent for a specific tribe or group and Only Prophet Mohammad (P.B.U.H) is send for the whole man kind and this would contradict Quran. What is the response to that?
6) Those who say it was local say it on the grounds that World wide flood contradicts Quran because Allah سبحانه وتعالى doesn't punish a nation until He sends a warner; therefore it is not possible that other nations would have drowned prior to recieving the warning. What is your response to this?


These questions are self contradictory.

E.g. See 1st and 2nd questions, it means it was worldwide flood.
If it was local then they could be commanded to migrate to other part of the world. So making boat was also not needed.

Q 5 and 6: Probably there was no other nation on earth except them.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
89
Brother
35
#6 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:22
Arfatzafar wrote:
View original post


How are these questions self contradictory?

The statement "John is dead and John is not dead" is a self-contradiction. Contradictions are impossible. It may be that you didn't read the entire posts or didn't understand the questions. Classical scholars like ibn Khatir said it was a world wide flood. Some scholars of today like Zakir Naik say it was a local flood owing to the scientific evidence based on archaeology. I am trying to find which opinion should we take? And Is science the ruler by which we judge Quran? What if science in future took a U-turn about this so called Archeaological fact, what would happen to the Iman of those who understood this scientific concept and said Quran is talking about the local flood.

The questions are not contradictory and have valid premises. These Questions are raised for both Sides.Those who say "It was a local flood" and those who say it was a "Widespread" flood. I am asking which one is correct based on classical scholarship and whether the scientific approach to the DIVINE Text is valid methodology or not?

Those who say it was a local flood.
These questions are asked against those who say it was a local flood.
Q1) If it was a local flood, why Allah سبحانه وتعالى commanded Nuh (A.S) to take pairs of Animals with him?
This in other words mean if the flood was meant to affect a local region, why did Nuh (A.S) took Pairs of Animals with him?
Q2)If it was a local flood , why Allah told Nuh (A.S) to build a boat when He could have told him to Migrate or do Hijrah to some other place like that happened at the time of Hazrat Lut (A.S).
This in other words mean if the flood was meant to affect a local region why was there a need to build boat. Nuh (A.S) could have been ordered to Migrate to other parts of the world where there was no chance of flood occuring.
Q3)Why would orthodox scholars interpret this to be a world wide flood if Quran wasn't specifying whether it was local or wide?
Q4) Those who say it is Local say it on the grounds that Scientific Archaelogical evidence suggests that. Is that a valid methodology of approaching Quran and Hadith?

Those who say it was a widespread flood.
These questions are asked against those who say it was a widespread flood.
Q5)Nuh (A.S) was sent for a specific tribe or group and Only Prophet Mohammad (P.B.U.H) is send for the whole man kind. If we believe the flood was widespread it assumes that Prophet (Nuh) A.S was sent fot the entire man kind and it contradicts the Quran.
Q6)It is in Quran that Allah سبحانه وتعالى doesn't punish a nation until He sends a warner; therefore it is not possible that other nations would have drowned prior to recieving the warning.

I hope I made myself clear this time in sha Allah.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Servant.Of.Allah's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
604
Brother
497
Servant.Of.Allah's avatar
#7 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:27
Impact/Outcomes of Local Vs Global Moon-sighting
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
20,794
Brother
6,918
abu mohammed's avatar
#8 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:28
saa10245 wrote:
Some scholars of today like Zakir Naik

He is not a scholar. He is an orator and specialist in comparitive religion.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Like x 2Agree x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Servant.Of.Allah's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
604
Brother
497
Servant.Of.Allah's avatar
#9 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:35
abu mohammed wrote:
View original post

Hi is a Doctor too.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
89
Brother
35
#10 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:41
abu mohammed wrote:
View original post


Jazak Allah for your reply. What about Zakir Naik's approach i.e. utilizing science to prove the Divine nature of the Quran.Do you think this is a valid methodology?
Before you answer read this by brother Hamza Zortis.

Quote:

Does the Qur’an Contain Scientific Miracles? A New Approach on how to Reconcile and Discuss Science in the Qur’an
.....
The internet is full of websites, essays, videos and posts on the scientific verses in the Qur’ān. A Google search on “Quran and science” produces over 40 million search results.[1]

This movement has classical and modern origins. The Islamic classical scholarly tradition was engaged in a debate as to whether to use science as an exegetical tool to explain the Qur’ānic verses. However, it was during the eighties that the apologetic expression of this movement was born. I would argue there are two main events that facilitated the emergence of this movement. The first was the publishing of the book Bible, the Qur’ān and Science in 1976 written by Dr. Maurice Bucaille, and the second was the 1980s video This is The Truth produced by the Islamic scholar Abdul-Majeed al-Zindani. Dr Bucaille’s book argued that there were no scientific errors in the Qur’ān and that the Bible was full of scientific inaccuracies. Dr. Bucaille’s book became a best seller in the Muslim world and it was translated into many languages. Even though the book has faced academic criticism[2], it is still a popular read and used as a reference for Islamic apologetics and proselytisation.

The Islamic Scholar Abdul-Majeed al-Zindani, founder of the Commission on Scientific Signs in the Qur’ān and Sunnah, produced a video entitled This is the Truth. Al-Zindani invited prominent Western academics to attend one of their conferences. During the conference al-Zindani claimed that a group of eminent non-Muslim scholars in several fields testified to the fact that there were scientific miracles in the Qur’ān. However, the Commission received criticism that it had spread out of context and misleading statements to justify its narrative.[3] Relatively recently an Atheist video blogger and commentator personally contacted some of the scientists who had attended the conference and conducted interviews with them. The interviews were recorded and uploaded on YouTube. All of the scientists he interviewed claimed that their statements had been taken out of context, and that there is nothing miraculous about the scientific statements in the Qur’ānic discourse.[4]

In spite of this, millions of booklets and pamphlets have been printed that make the claim that there are scientific miracles in the Qur’ān, and countless non-Muslims have converted to Islam as a result. This growing movement has influenced academia too, for example an academic book published by Curzon entitled Qur’ān Translation: Discourse, Texture and Exegesis dedicates a few pages on the topic.[5] Famous popularisers such as Dr. Zakir Naik[6] and Yusuf Estes[7] have also used the scientific miracles narrative to verify the Divine nature of the Qur’ān. Due to this intense popularisation over the past few decades, there is now a growing counter movement that attempts to demystify the so-called scientific statements, and they seem to be more nuanced, with a growing popularity. A significant number of apostates from Islam (many of whom I have had private conversations with) cite the counter movement’s work as a causal factor in deciding to leave the religion. Nevertheless, I do believe that apostasy is not entirely an intellectual decision but rather a spiritual and psychological problem. This can include a lack of spiritual connection with God and disheartenment with Islam due to unfortunate negative experiences with Muslims and the the Muslim community.

Regrettably, the scientific miracles narrative has become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslim apologists, including myself. A few years ago I took some activists to Ireland to engage with the audience and speakers at the World Atheist Convention. Throughout the convention we had a stall outside the venue and as a result positively engaged with hundreds of atheists, including the popular atheist academics Professor P. Z. Myers and Professor Richard Dawkins. During our impromptu conversation with Professor Myers we ended up talking about God’s existence and the Divine nature of the Qur’ān. The topic of embryology came up, and Professor Myers being an expert in the field challenged our narrative. He claimed that the Qur’ān did not predate modern scientific conclusions in the field. As a result of posting the video[8] of the engagement on-line we faced a huge intellectual backlash. We received innumerable amounts of emails by Muslims and non-Muslims. The Muslims were confused and had doubts, and the non-Muslims were bemused with the whole approach. Consequently, I decided to compile and write an extensive piece on the Qur’ān and embryology, with the intention to respond to popular and academic contentions.[9] During the process of writing I relied on students and scholars of Islamic thought to verify references and to provide feedback in areas where I had to rely on secondary and tertiary sources. Unfortunately they were not thorough and they seemed to have also relied on trusting other Muslim apologists. When the paper was published it was placed under a microscope by atheist activists.[10] Although they misrepresented some of the points, they raised some significant contentions. I have since removed the paper from my website. In retrospect if this never happened, I probably wouldn’t be writing this essay now. It is all a learning curve and an important part of developing intellectual integrity.

In light of this, this essay aims to provide a rational and Islamic perspective on how to understand the scientific verses in the Qur’ān. It is time more people from the Muslim community spoke out against this problematic approach to verifying the Divine nature of the Qur’ān. It has become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslim apologists and it has exposed the lack of coherence in the way they have formulated the argument. Significantly, many Muslims who converted to Islam due to the scientific miracles narrative, have left the religion due to encountering opposing arguments. This essay intends to explain how the scientific miracles narrative is problematic and incoherent, and it aims to bring to light a new approach on how to reconcile and discuss science in the Qur’ān. It must be noted that I am not asserting that the Qur’ān is inaccurate or wrong, or that there is nothing remarkable about the Qur’ānic statements eluding to natural phenomena. I am simply bringing to light the perilous nature of the claim that some Qur’ānic verses are miraculous due to their scientific content. For this reason, I am offering a new approach to the topic that is nuanced and bypasses the intellectual hurdles and problems faced by the scientific miracles narrative.

A summary of the scientific miracles claim

The scientific miracles of the Qur’ān are expressed in different ways but with the same philosophical implications.

The Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be peace) did not have access to the scientific knowledge mentioned in the Qur’ān, therefore it must be from God.
No one at the time of revelation (7th century) had access to the necessary equipment to understand or verify the scientific knowledge in the Qur’ān, therefore it must be from God.
The Qur’ānic verses where revealed at a time where science was primitive and no human could have uttered the truths mentioned in the Qur’ān, therefore it must be from God.

There are an array of reasons of why the above expressions of the scientific miracles are problematic and incoherent. These include,

The Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle
Inaccurate History
Teleology of the Qur’ānic Verses
Scientism, the Problem of Induction and Empiricism
“Unscientific” Verses
Miracles, Simplicity and A Note on Qur’ānic Exegesis

Each of these points will now be explained in detail.

1. The Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle

The science in the Qur’ān claim commits a logical fallacy called the fallacy of the undistributed middle. This fallacy is where two different things are equated due to a common middle ground that is misused. Below is a generic example:

1. All As are Cs

2. All Bs are Cs

3. Therefore all As are Bs

The above fallacy is in the conclusion. Since A and B share the common category C, it doesn’t follow that A is the same as B.

Another example includes:

John needs oxygen to survive
My dog needs oxygen to survive
Therefore John is my dog

As can be seen above, the middle ground that is misused is oxygen. Although the first two premises are true, that both John and my dog need oxygen to survive, it doesn’t follow that John is my dog.

Most of the science in the Qur’ān arguments commit this type of fallacy. Below is a summary:

A description of a scientific fact A uses C
A description in the Qur’ān B uses C
Therefore, the description in the Qur’ān B is the description of A

The following are some specific examples:

The scientific fact in embryology is the implantation of the blastocyst in the uterine wall. Implantation can be attributed as a safe place.
The Qur’ān uses the words qarārin[11] makīn[12], which can mean a safe place.
Therefore, the Qur’ān is describing the scientific fact of the implantation of the blastocyst.

In the above syllogism, it doesn’t follow that the words qarārin makīn (a safe place) imply the process of implantation just because it to shares the attribute of a safe place. The argument will only be valid if all descriptions of qarārin makīn refers to, and describes, the process of implantation. Since qarārin makīn can also refer to the womb[13], which was the 7th century understanding of the words, then the argument is invalid. The mere correlation between a Qur’ānic word and a scientific process or description does not ascertain the intended meaning of the verse.

Another example includes:

The scientific fact is that the Earth’s atmosphere helps destroy meteorites as they approach Earth, filters harmful light rays, protects against the cold temperatures of space, and its Van Allen Belt acts like as a shield against the harmful radiation. The Earth’s atmosphere can be attributed as a protected roof.
The Qur’ān uses the words saqfan maḥfūẓan, which means a protect roof.[14]
Therefore, the Qur’ān is describing the function of the Earth’s atmosphere.

Again, the above syllogism is invalid. It doesn’t logically follow that the words saqfan maḥfūẓan, which refers to a protected roof, describes the function of the Earth’s atmosphere. This is because saqfan maḥfūẓan can also refer to a physical roof. Some interpretations of the Qur’ān include that the heaven is erected with invisible pillars, and that a fragment of the heaven or sky can fall on Earth; (see Qur’ān 13:2 and 34:9). These interpretations indicate a solid roof like structure, as confirmed by the classical exegete Ibn Kathīr who cites a scholar mentioning that “the heaven is like a dome over the earth”.[15] Therefore the words saqfan maḥfūẓan can also refer to a physical roof or dome like structure. For that reason, the above argument will only be valid if all interpretations and descriptions of saqfan maḥfūẓan describes the function of Earth’s atmosphere.

In light of the above, the argument that the Qur’ān is a miracle because the descriptions of certain words it uses seem to relate to descriptions of words used in scientific facts, is logically fallacious. The scientific miracles claim would only be valid if it could be demonstrated that the interpretations of the words that seem to correlate with science are the intended meanings. The principles of Qur’ānic exegesis dictates that this is impossible to ascertain (this will be discussed later in the essay).

Furthermore, there a myriad of questions that exposes the incoherence of the scientific miracles narrative. For instance: why are the more simpler explanations and meanings of the verses in the Qur’ān dismissed? What about the alternative valid interpretations of these verses that are unscientific or crude? Since the ambiguity of the words renders it impossible to know what the intended meaning of the verses are, how can anyone claim them to be miracles? What about the ancient civilisations and their accurate predictions of scientific phenomena before they were verified by modern science? Does that make the ancient civilisations Divinely inspired?


Article continues further from here

Full article available at his website.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
20,794
Brother
6,918
abu mohammed's avatar
#11 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:41
Servant.Of.Allah wrote:
View original post

Not in Islamic studies. He is a Doctor in the Medical field. He is a trained Physician. Hence I did not mention his other qualification.

The point is that he is not a scholar
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Agree x 2
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
20,794
Brother
6,918
abu mohammed's avatar
#12 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 14:45
saa10245 wrote:
View original post

Before reading the above (I still have to pray dhohar Salah), I will get back to the above.

But for now, Science agrees with the Quran. The Quran doesn't have to agree with science. If science cannot agree with Islam, then it is just a matter of time until it does!
report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Like x 2Agree x 2
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
20,794
Brother
6,918
abu mohammed's avatar
#13 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 15:57
saa10245 wrote:
View original post

If brother Hamza wants to go in really deep, maybe br. Hamza could do with a read over and correct some typos :)

Otherwise, it is long and overworked. Not much need to go into such details and examples.

No matter how much he/we go into this discusion, we know full well what their final question will be! And this qustion will come from Shaytan. So it's better for us not to go there.

The Quran has not erred. The errors are from those trying to explain it in their word and to their understanding of their time.

report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Agree x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
89
Brother
35
#14 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 16:01
abu mohammed wrote:
View original post


I think you missed the point of the article. It actually splices the traditonal scientific approach utilized by the Zakir naik and others who try to prove the Quran's Divine origins using science. And he establishes the newer approach which is far more convincing.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
20,794
Brother
6,918
abu mohammed's avatar
#15 [Permalink] Posted on 13th February 2019 16:23
I don't think it's a newer approach.

It's a matter of saying it correctly. In other words, syllogism!

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top