|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/26/2008 1:43:36 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: yod
"The Bride" has been Israel since 3,000 years before there ever was a christian church....
I’m sorry, but please read the Scripture below:
Gal 4:25-26
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
There is a clear distinction between the “Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage” and “Jerusalem which is above is free”.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/27/2008 11:18:58 AM
|
|
|
yod
Posts: 77
Joined: 5/2/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
quote:
ORIGINAL: yod
"The Bride" has been Israel since 3,000 years before there ever was a christian church....
I’m sorry, but please read the Scripture below:
Gal 4:25-26
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
There is a clear distinction between the “Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage” and “Jerusalem which is above is free”.
There has ALWAYS been 2 Jerusalem's.
In fact, the name of Jerusalem in hebrew (Yerushalayim) is plural. any word in hebrew with an "-im" on the end of it is plural, like seraphim, cherubim, etc....
This speaks of the eternal nature of the City of the Great King. So all you've done is show that Yerushalayim has always been the Bride. Thanks for your support!
And as I pointed out in my previous post, all of the spiritual symbolism of heaven and The Kingdom finds it's literal reality in Israel. Thanks for helping me show that again...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/27/2008 11:25:20 AM
|
|
|
yod
Posts: 77
Joined: 5/2/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JoToP
Yod,
Where's Dan?
I don't know. Who's on first?
Dan is missing from being mentioned among the tribes in Revelation. Why is that relevant to this conversation?
Where is Ephraim? Why is Menasseh mentioned but not his brother? Why is Manasseh mentioned separately from his father, Joseph? What happened to Enoch? How many children did Abraham have after Sarah died? Where did Yeshua live in Eygpt and for how long?
There are a lot of unanswered questions in the bible which have nothing to do with who the Bride is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 9:12:31 AM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6429
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Topher, I really have trouble following you. You base a whole doctrine like this on a couple of verses in the book of Revelation, dismissing clarification found elsewhere in scripture. You dismiss tithing because it is OT. Then you parade selected OT verses to condemn the consumption of alcohol in any amount.
Have you ever considered adopting a cohesive theological discipline?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 10:04:47 AM
|
|
|
JoToP
Posts: 688
Status: offline
|
Yod,
quote:
Namely, that the "church" is a separate institution that supercedes Israel.
That’s not my view. The Church is Israel. Always has been.
quote:
There are a lot of unanswered questions in the bible which have nothing to do with who the Bride is.
Well, I think you’d better answer this question. After all, you said yourself, ”The gates of heaven are named after her tribes! Heaven itself is called New Jerusalem! The nations come singing to the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev 5:5)!”
You even put an exclamation mark after it as if you were pretty excited about it. Your gates seem to be missing a tribe or two. Actually, your gate is missing several tribes. When you go talking about “Israel” you better define your terms clearly. The northern kingdom is gone. We’re talking Gone, gone. So, when the Bible subsequently talks in terms of tribes, you’re on pretty shaky grounds when you go trying to resurrect tribes that don’t exist. Those tribes have meaning which continues past the life of the tribe and take on the name of the tribe even when the tribe is gone. The next question, then, is what is signified by the tribes? And does it start 1447 B.C. or does it have its roots from the beginning, before there was an Israel?
Oh. And, by the way:
quote:
"The Bride" has been Israel since 3,000 years before there ever was a christian church. The nations, all of them...every tribe and every tongue, will come to the glory of that Kingdom just as Isaiah speaks of clearly in chapter 60.
The Exodus took place in 1447 B.C. Just in case you didn’t know. 3000 B.C. is an Ante-Diluvian date. There was no hint of an Israel, then. There was a church, then, however... at least the roots of it. It might have been called the Church of the Sons of God... something like that, or the Church of Abel, maybe. Kind of important not to go exaggerating if you want credibility in a discussion.
_____________________________
And if you don't like THAT answer, I have more in
J  T P's
The Blogge
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 11:29:55 AM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
Topher, I really have trouble following you. You base a whole doctrine like this on a couple of verses in the book of Revelation, dismissing clarification found elsewhere in scripture. You dismiss tithing because it is OT. Then you parade selected OT verses to condemn the consumption of alcohol in any amount.
Thank you Jimbo, and good morning to you.
If you desire to stick with this OP, I will do my best to answer you. As for the other topics, please feel free to address them in the appropriate threads.
Regarding the “the bride, the Lamb’s wife”, and supposedly “dismissing clarification found elsewhere in scripture”, neither you or anyone else has been able to provide any Scripture to support the false bridal theology.
Again, I did trace this false teaching as far back as the past 900+ years, and to the Roman church (via so-called “Saint” Bernard).
Please stay with the topic, and provide YOUR Scripture to support your view.
Thanks again.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 11:34:55 AM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
Have you ever considered adopting a cohesive theological discipline?
I just read my Bible and trust that God teaches me through His Spirit. Please see below.
John 16:13
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
I Jn 2:27
27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 11:39:35 AM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6429
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
Please stay with the topic, and provide YOUR Scripture to support your view.
Well, you see, it's not MY scripture any more than it is YOURS. But more than ample scripture has been presented, so there's nothing relevant left to be addressed in this thread.
I simply wondered at the inconsistencies of how you apply scripture to fit your theories. If that isn't important to you then I guess we can let this thread die since you cannot convince anyone of your revelation that apparently has been hidden from the rest of Christendom, lo, these 2 millennium.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 11:55:11 AM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
Please stay with the topic, and provide YOUR Scripture to support your view.
Well, you see, it's not MY scripture any more than it is YOURS. But more than ample scripture has been presented, so there's nothing relevant left to be addressed in this thread.
Please show me where YOU have provided any Scripture to support your view.
If you desire to have a true Biblical discussion with me, you will need to provide Scripture to support your view in this or any other thread. I have provided many Scriptures in all of the threads I post in.
Thanks again.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 12:32:51 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6429
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
I have neither the time nor the desire to search through ten pages of posts to remind you of what has been said either by me or other posters. If you reject good counsel or instruction before, why should anyone waste time doing it again?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 12:46:54 PM
|
|
|
BookerG
Posts: 88
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
Again, I did trace this false teaching as far back as the past 900+ years, and to the Roman church (via so-called “Saint” Bernard).
You didn't do your research very well. Methodius, who died in 311 wrote a long treatise Symposium on Virginity, describing the Church as the Bride of Christ. A couple quotes:
In a chapter called The Church, the One Only Spouse, More Excellent Than the Others.
"Hence the Word has with deep perception called the souls of the prophets concubines, because He did not espouse them openly, as He did the Church."
"Neither the queens, nor the concubines, nor the virgins, are compared to the Church. For she is reckoned the perfect and chosen one beyond all these, consisting and composed of all the apostles, the Bride who surpasses all in the beauty of youth and virginity."
Or Augustine in his exposition on Psalm 127: "For the Church the Lord's Bride was created from His side, as Eve was created from the side of Adam."
I found those in just a few minutes of searching. I'm sure I could find more.
And one more Bible passage, has anyone mentioned in this long discussion 2 Corinthians 11:2? It doesn't specifically use the word bride, but speaking to the Church in Corinth Paul says, "For I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ."
But I suspect Notmycity will accept nothing less than a passage that specifically says "The Church is the bride." And he thinks that because heavenly Jerusalem is called the Bride, nothing else can ever be called the Bride. It's an illustration. The same illustration can be used for more than one thing. I can't see why it is so horrible to compare the love and faithfulness Christ has for us to marriage.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 1:13:33 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BookerG
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
Again, I did trace this false teaching as far back as the past 900+ years, and to the Roman church (via so-called “Saint” Bernard).
You didn't do your research very well. Methodius, who died in 311 wrote a long treatise Symposium on Virginity, describing the Church as the Bride of Christ. A couple quotes:
In a chapter called The Church, the One Only Spouse, More Excellent Than the Others.
"Hence the Word has with deep perception called the souls of the prophets concubines, because He did not espouse them openly, as He did the Church."
"Neither the queens, nor the concubines, nor the virgins, are compared to the Church. For she is reckoned the perfect and chosen one beyond all these, consisting and composed of all the apostles, the Bride who surpasses all in the beauty of youth and virginity."
Or Augustine in his exposition on Psalm 127: "For the Church the Lord's Bride was created from His side, as Eve was created from the side of Adam."
I found those in just a few minutes of searching. I'm sure I could find more.
And one more Bible passage, has anyone mentioned in this long discussion 2 Corinthians 11:2? It doesn't specifically use the word bride, but speaking to the Church in Corinth Paul says, "For I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ."
But I suspect Notmycity will accept nothing less than a passage that specifically says "The Church is the bride." And he thinks that because heavenly Jerusalem is called the Bride, nothing else can ever be called the Bride. It's an illustration. The same illustration can be used for more than one thing. I can't see why it is so horrible to compare the love and faithfulness Christ has for us to marriage.
Thank you for the above info. It’s very helpful and i do appreciate your taking the time.
Please feel free to provide more extra-Biblical sources, as it will only help my ongoing research.
You cited writers from the Roman Church, which only further confirms that this teaching has its roots in the Roman Church. Would you agree?
Thank you.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 1:17:37 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
I have neither the time nor the desire to search through ten pages of posts to remind you of what has been said either by me or other posters. If you reject good counsel or instruction before, why should anyone waste time doing it again?
If you’re not prepared to back your view with Scripture, or even foot-noted extra-Biblical sources, you’re not really contributing to this thread.
Thank you.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 1:55:45 PM
|
|
|
BookerG
Posts: 88
Status: offline
|
No, I would not agree it has Catholic roots. It has Scriptural roots. As I have indicated from 2 Cor. 11:2 and Eph 5:25-27. Others have cited other pertinent verses. They may not convince you, but I am fully satisfied that they describe the Church as Christ's bride.
Remember what marriage was back then. The essence of marriage was when a man and woman pledged their lifelong love and faithfulness to each other. That happened at their engagement. They were married in God's eyes. But they did not come together to live as husband and wife until there was a public wedding to proclaim their union. That's why Joseph was called Mary's husband before they came together as husband and wife, and why he had in mind to divorce her, even though there had been no wedding yet.
The Church, consisting of all whom Christ has promised his love and faithfulness and who have pledged their own love and faithfulness to him, are his betrothed. We are husband and wife now in God's eyes. On Judgment Day there will be in a sense a glorious wedding banquet to mark the beginning of living in his home forever. We will become citizens of that heavenly Jerusalem that is called the Bride coming to meet her Groom. But we are already united to him by our mutual pledge. We are already his wife. Would it be better to call the Church his Bride-to-be or his fiancee? But those terms weren't used in Bible times. If you really want to nitpick, a bride is only a bride during the one hour ceremony. After that she's a wife. Well, the Church is Christ's wife before the ceremony. We're not living in his home yet, but the promise and the union has taken place. You can quibble about exactly when and where the specific word "bride" is appropriate to use, as opposed to wife or betrothed or spouse or one flesh or whatever other vocable one could come up with.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/28/2008 3:10:04 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BookerG
No, I would not agree it has Catholic roots. It has Scriptural roots. As I have indicated from 2 Cor. 11:2 and Eph 5:25-27.
I addressed those passages earlier on. Neither calls the church “the bride of Christ”.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/29/2008 5:14:54 PM
|
|
|
yod
Posts: 77
Joined: 5/2/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JoToP
That’s not my view. The Church is Israel. Always has been.
That view was invented by Origen more than a century after the resurrection and popularized by Augustine. Both are post-biblical theologians who read latin transcripts of greek translations of hebraic concepts. They didn't even know the original language so how can anyone possibly give them any credibilty? They contradict the Lord, the Apostles, and every disciple with their false doctrine. I choose the bible.
This "Israel is the church" theory certainly isn't found in the bible anywhere. The assembly, the congregation, the gathering included gentiles who were joined to the remnant of Israel which made them "partakers" in the "commonwealth of Israel" according to Paul but it didn't make them Israel.
They (we) are grafted into what God began millenia before european theologians invented a separate institution called "the church".
quote:
Well, I think you’d better answer this question. After all, you said yourself, ”The gates of heaven are named after her tribes! Heaven itself is called New Jerusalem! The nations come singing to the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev 5:5)!”
You even put an exclamation mark after it as if you were pretty excited about it.
why shouldn't I be?
quote:
Your gates seem to be missing a tribe or two. Actually, your gate is missing several tribes.
how do you figure that? The Word says it is named after the 12 sons of Israel. That would include Dan even if he wasn't included in the 144,000 jews of Revelation 7 for whatever reason we might speculate
quote:
When you go talking about “Israel” you better define your terms clearly.
I define it the way it is defined by all the writers of the Bible. The literal sons of Jacob. There are additional definitions such as the land that they live in but there isn't one single place you could point to where it is defined as a separate christian institution.
That is pure fantasy born of post-biblical European theologians.
quote:
The northern kingdom is gone. We’re talking Gone, gone.
So is God a liar? In Ezekial 37, He says that He will cause them to return
11 Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. They indeed say, ‘Our bones are dry, our hope is lost, and we ourselves are cut off!’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Behold, O My people, I will open your graves and cause you to come up from your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. 13 Then you shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O My people, and brought you up from your graves. 14 I will put My Spirit in you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I, the LORD, have spoken it and performed it,” says the LORD.’”
15 Again the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 16 “As for you, son of man, take a stick for yourself and write on it: ‘For Judah and for the children of Israel, his companions.’ Then take another stick and write on it, ‘For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel, his companions.’ 17 Then join them one to another for yourself into one stick, and they will become one in your hand.
18 “And when the children of your people speak to you, saying, ‘Will you not show us what you mean by these?’— 19 say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Surely I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel, his companions; and I will join them with it, with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they will be one in My hand.”’ 20 And the sticks on which you write will be in your hand before their eyes.
21 “Then say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Surely I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, wherever they have gone, and will gather them from every side and bring them into their own land; 22 and I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king over them all; they shall no longer be two nations, nor shall they ever be divided into two kingdoms again. 23 They shall not defile themselves anymore with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions; but I will deliver them from all their dwelling places in which they have sinned, and will cleanse them. Then they shall be My people, and I will be their God.
24 “David My servant shall be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd; they shall also walk in My judgments and observe My statutes, and do them. 25 Then they shall dwell in the land that I have given to Jacob My servant, where your fathers dwelt; and they shall dwell there, they, their children, and their children’s children, forever; and My servant David shall be their prince forever. 26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them, and it shall be an everlasting covenant with them; I will establish them and multiply them, and I will set My sanctuary in their midst forevermore. 27 My tabernacle also shall be with them; indeed I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 28 The nations also will know that I, the LORD, sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary is in their midst forevermore.”’”
quote:
So, when the Bible subsequently talks in terms of tribes, you’re on pretty shaky grounds when you go trying to resurrect tribes that don’t exist. Those tribes have meaning which continues past the life of the tribe and take on the name of the tribe even when the tribe is gone. The next question, then, is what is signified by the tribes? And does it start 1447 B.C. or does it have its roots from the beginning, before there was an Israel?
Many consider Shem the forerunner of the "Shemites" (semitic peoples) but we'll start with Jacob, father to the sons of Israel. That still puts Israel 1850 years before the Acts chapter 2; which was also 100% Israel also since the first gentile didn't come into the assembly for another 30-40 years.
No matter how far back it goes, the wedding ceremony between the Lord and Israel happened at Sinai. When do you say that He changed His mind to go commit adultery with another?
There certainly is no record of that within the pages of His Word....only in post-biblical european institutions.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/29/2008 5:19:32 PM
|
|
|
yod
Posts: 77
Joined: 5/2/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Methodius, who died in 311 wrote a long treatise Symposium on Virginity, describing the Church as the Bride of Christ.
Or Augustine in his exposition on Psalm 127: "For the Church the Lord's Bride was created from His side, as Eve was created from the side of Adam."
more post-biblical european theologians.
Do you guys realize that not a single european ever wrote scripture?
have you noticed that you can't support your theory using any scripture?
quote:
And one more Bible passage, has anyone mentioned in this long discussion 2 Corinthians 11:2? It doesn't specifically use the word bride, but speaking to the Church in Corinth Paul says, "For I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ."
And this is true though it doesn't say anything about "the church" being the Bride. Paul is talking to people whom he was training in the faith of the remnant of Israel.
Paul was also the one who said that those nations who had come into the faith were joined "to the people of God" (jews!) and had become partakers in the commonwealth of Israel.
In plain language, they became the Bride by being joined to Israel. Not the other way around and no other way.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/29/2008 5:27:52 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JoToP
That’s not my view. The Church is Israel. Always has been.
Ah, replacement theology again. Chapter and verse please?
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 2/29/2008 5:34:50 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6429
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
quote:
ORIGINAL: JoToP
That’s not my view. The Church is Israel. Always has been.
Ah, replacement theology again. Chapter and verse please?
Please forgive this old fool for butting in, but where do you get "replacement" if JoToP stated that the Church "Always" was Israel? Sounds more like "Equal Theology" to me.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 3/11/2008 11:22:17 AM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
quote:
ORIGINAL: JoToP
That’s not my view. The Church is Israel. Always has been.
Ah, replacement theology again. Chapter and verse please?
Please forgive this old fool for butting in, but where do you get "replacement" if JoToP stated that the Church "Always" was Israel? Sounds more like "Equal Theology" to me.
Thanks
And still NO Scripture to support your belief...
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Church as the so-called bride of Christ? - 6/17/2008 2:49:07 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1165
Status: offline
|
Hi,
Just checking in to see if there are any further developments...
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
Will the circle 