PASSOVER---- A JEWISH SEDER?

Passover - A Jewish Seder?

A look at both gives the answer

             The following article appeared in 

             BIBLE REVIEW

            Summer 1987

     Called "Was the Last Supper a Passover Jewish Sedar?"

by Baruch M. Bokser 

With some additional comments and all capital words

     by

    Keith Hunt

     To this day, Jews throughout the world observe the Passover

festival with a highly ritualized meal called a SEDER. The word

means "order" and refers to the order of the SERVICE at the meal,

including prayers, psalms, other readings, the retelling of the

story of the Exodus from Egypt and the eating of special foods

that have symbolic significance.

     It is commonly SUPPOSED that the Last Supper, the meal Jesus

ate with his disciples the night before his crucifixion, was a

SEDER.

     But was the Last Supper a Passover seder?

     The question itself assumes that the Last Supper occurred on

the eve of Passover ... The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and

Luke) clearly indicate that the Last Supper was the Passover

meal:

     "And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they

     sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him,

     'Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the

     Passover?'" (Mark 14:12; see also the parallel passages in

     Matthew 26:17 and Luke 22:7-9).

     The disciples then "prepared the Passover" (Mark 14:16;

Matthew 26:19; Luke 22:13). "When it was evening, he sat at the

table with the twelve disciples" (Matthew 26:20 and, with slight

variations, Mark 14:17 and Luke 22:14). This is the account in

the Synoptic Gospels.

     According to the Gospel of John ... referring to the same

meal, at which Judas betrayed Jesus, John tells us that it

occurred "before the feast of Passover John 13:1, see also John

19:42). Moreover, after the Last Supper, between the second and

third time Peter denied he was a disciple of Jesus, when Jesus

was taken to Pilate - we are told that the Jews had not yet eaten

the Passover (John 18:28). Finally, John is careful to point out

that Jesus' crucifixion occurred on "the day of Preparation for

the Passover" John 19:14).

     Scholars have provided a variety of responses to this

apparent discrepancy. Some say John is correct and the synoptics

are incorrect (Of course both are correct for all four were

inspired by God to write what they wrote - Keith Hunt). Others

say the synoptics are correct and John is incorrect (No, all are

correct, for ALL Scripture is given by the inspiration of God - 

2 Tim.3:16 - Keith Hunt). 

     Still others attempt to harmonize the two accounts by

suggesting that they are referring to different calendars (The

answer simply lies in the fact that the true Old Testament

Passover was at the beginning of the 14th day, when Jesus then

observed it with his disciples, and what John relates is the

Pharisees Passover at the middle and end of the 14th going on

into the 15th. It was called also in every-day language "the

Passover" - John simply does not stop to take the time to

explain, he just uses the language and phrase "the Passover" for

indeed the Pharisees Passover meal had not yet begun when he was

relating the events prior to it. The synoptic Gospels are all

very clear that what Jesus observed with His disciples was "the

Passover" - the reader should then know that Jesus observed the

true Passover of the Old Testament, at the correct time of the

beginning of the 14th. I cover all this in great detail in all of

my Passover studies on this Website - Keith Hunt).

     Putting chronology aside for the moment, I would like to

focus on the NATURE of the Last Supper. Was it a SEDER meal 

as we have come to know it, assuming that it occurred on the eve 

of Passover?

     The answer, I believe, is NO!

     The seder meal as we know it did not DEVELOP until AFTER 70

AD., in RESPONSE to the Roman destruction of the Temple that

ended the First Jewish Revolt.

     The description of the Passover festival in the Hebrew Bible

seems to combine two originally independent festivals (No, the

Bible does not combine them at all, it is the Pharisees Jews that

combined them - Keith Hunt). The FIRST was an ancient

agricultural festival known as the Festival of Unleavened Bread

(an alternative name for Passover, both in the New Testament and

among Jews even today). Unleavened bread (matzah), without yeast,

was baked at the time of the first harvest, in early spring. The

Bible assumes that this festival commemorates the Exodus from

Egypt and that the unleavened bread symbolizes that experience,

in particular, the haste with which the Israelites fled (Exodus

12:17-20,29). The SECOND festival was the Festival of the

Passover Offering, commemorating the historic deliverance of the

Jews when God slew the Egyptian firstborn, but passed over the

houses of Jews whose doorposts were swabbed with the blood of 

a sacrificial lamb (Exodus 12:13,23-27). It was at this point that

Pharaoh allowed the enslaved Israelites to leave Egypt.

     The fullest biblical account of the evening Passover observance 

is found in Exodus 12, which sets out what should be done on the 

first Passover night and how it should be remembered in subsequent 

years.

     The Israelites are instructed to prepare a Passover offering, 

and eat it with bitter herbs and unleavened bread, and to put some 

of the sacrificial animal's blood on the doorposts so as to provide 

a sign that the Destroyer or angel of death should "pass over" the 

Israelite homes and afflict only the Egyptian firstborn.

     To ensure that the story is retold in subsequent years, the

Bible uses a pedagogic device: "And when your children ask you,

'What do you mean by this rite?' you shall say, 'It is the Passover 

sacrifice to the Lord, because He passed over the houses of the 

Israelites in Egypt when He smote the Egyptians, but saved

our houses"' (Exodus 12:26-27). The sacrifice and placing of the

blood on the doorposts are assumed to elicit this question from

the child.

     Here and in all other biblical references to the evening

rite the text assumes the CENTRALITY of the sacrifice; the

SACRIFICE is the HEART of the rite. Thus, Numbers 9:1-15

considers the need for a "second Passover" for those who cannot

observe the first because they were in a state of impurity or on

a journey, they must bring a paschal offering one month later and

eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. The implication is

that the holiday cannot be celebrated WITHOUT this sacrificial

lamb.

     After the establishment of the monarchy and construction of

Solomon's Temple, the nature of the Passover observance changed.

     According to the Bible, before this time it had been a

DOMESTIC observance. The biblical text, even before Solomon's

time, nevertheless looks forward to the place that "God will

choose" for his sanctuary (Deuteronomy 16:2); that is, Jerusalem.

     When, in the time of the monarchy, God had in fact chosen

Jerusalem and his sanctuary was built there, the nature of the

Passover observance changed. The Passover sacrifice was still

central, but instead of a domestic observance, it became a

national pilgrim festival, with the sacrifice offered at God's

sanctuary in Jerusalem - though families might celebrate the

festival in that central location.

     Passover, at this point associated with joyous festivity,

took on the dimensions of a national holiday. A communal or

family meal still took place after the sacrifice, but the

SACRIFICE remained the critical feature and the eating of the

sacrificial animal was the ESSENTIAL CENTRAL element of 

the meal. As in earlier times, the unleavened bread and bitter 

herbs were eaten with the animal.

     Except for the change from a domestic observance wherever

Israelites assembled, to a national pilgrim festival in Jerusalem, 

the same basic pattern of observance is found in Joshua 5:10-11; 

2 Kings 23:21-24; Ezekiel 45:21; Ezra 6:19-22 and 2 Chronicles 

30:1-27; 35:1-19. The last two chapters of Chronicles, describing 

the Jerusalem observance, emphasize the great rejoicing, as well 

as the role of the Levites and other experts in singing praises to God; 

Chronicles also states that the eating of the Passover sacrifice took 

place in kinship groups.

(The writer forgets that before Jerusalem was the place where God

placed His name, it was Shiloh - hence before Solomon and David

his father, God had a place of "festival observance" and so

"pilgrim" feasts - Keith Hunt).

     Early post-biblical sources maintain the centrality of the

communal sacrificial meal, even when they supplement the biblical

heritage. For example, Jubilees, a post-biblical text from the

second century B.C., speaks of observing the rite of the Passover

offering at the central sanctuary in Jerusalem and EMPHASIZES the

slaughter of the sacrifice and the people's joy as they eat the

sacrifice, drink wine and praise God (Jubilees 49). (For the

first time, the drinking of wine is required. Reference to bitter

herbs is omitted, and unleavened bread is mentioned only as part

of the Festival of Unleavened Bread.) Other sources - the epic

Greek Jewish poet Ezekiel (second century B.C.), Samaritan

traditions, the Temple Scroll and other Dead Sea Scrolls - all

refer to an evening celebration CENTERING around the SACRIFICE.

     Even the Jewish philosopher Philo (c.30 B.C. - 45 AD.), who

adopts an allegorical reading of the Bible, assumes the centrality 

of the Passover offering and meal, which he spiritualizes. To the 

biblical record, he adds only the singing of prayers and hymns. 

He is clear, however, regarding the celebratory nature of the festival: 

the practice of "the whole people" offering the sacrifices, a people 

"raised for that day to the dignity of the priesthood ... was sanctioned 

by the law once in every year to remind them of their duty of 

thanksgiving." (Philo, Special Laws, 2:145-146,148)

(Yes, as Philo well knew, no Levitical Priesthood was needed to

kill the Passover lambs. The Passover lambs were to be killed in

the place where God had placed His name, Jerusalem in king

David's day, and after, but the Passover lambs did not have to be

killed in the Temple by the Priesthood - the people were the

priests on that day for that sacrifice, as Philo relates - Keith

Hunt). 

     The first-century Jewish historian Josephus, though

frequently mentioning Passover as a thanksgiving for the

deliverance from Egypt, describes the eating of the sacrifice in

fraternities, among the multitude of participants who came on

pilgrimage to Jerusalem. He refers to the great number of

sacrifices and the singing of the Levites accompanied by musical

instruments (Josephus, Wars, 6:423-424).

     These post-biblical texts DO note some CHANGES in observance

- prayers, wine, omission of bitter herbs, Levites singing, etc,

- but they consistently center on the SACRIFICE, a distinct

holiday of the Passover Offering. Preparing and bringing that

offering led up to the experience of the sacrifice, which

culminated in the sacrificial meal.

     Jews outside of Jerusalem who did not participate in the

sacrifice could still observe the seven-day Festival of

Unleavened Bread by avoiding leaven (This may even be attested in

the Elephantine sources; see Bokser, Origins, pp.20-21). 

     They might, on their own, gather to usher in the holiday

with a special meal, instruct a child on the meaning of the

event, offer praises to God and drink wine.

     But especially those who had once gone on pilgrimage to

Jerusalem would have realized that they were missing the national

celebration. WITHOUT the SACRIFICE, they could not fully share in

the experience of the observance in Jerusalem. Philo insightfully

grasped this dynamic:

     "Countless multitudes from countless cities come, some over

     land, others over sea, from east and west and north and

     south at every feast. They take the temple for their port as

     a general haven and safe refuge from the bustle and great

     turmoil of life, and there they seek to find calm weather,

     and, released from the cares whose yoke has been heavy upon

     them from their earliest years, to enjoy a brief breathing-space 

     in scenes of genial cheerfulness.

     Thus filled with comfortable hopes they devote the leisure,

     as is their bounded duty, to holiness and honouring of God.

     Friendships are formed between those who hitherto knew not

     each other, and the sacrifices and libations are the occasion 

     of reciprocity of feeling and constitute the surest pledge that all 

     are of one mind" (Philo, Special Laws, Book I, 69-70).

     Anthropologists like Victor Turner, have illuminated how the

heightened experience of departing from home and normal social

structures and going on pilgrimage amidst the throngs of pilgrims

would cause people to abandon their usual approach to the world

and open themselves to new experiences. Furthermore, people

gathering in one location reawaken, reinforce or create a sense

of being part of a larger group. In sharing something that was

offered to God, one not only sensed the divine presence, but

solidified one's bonds with those who shared in the meal.

     After the Roman destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., all

this was no longer possible. 

     A new challenge faced the Jewish community. How should it

observe a festival that had been tied so closely to the SACRIFICIAL 

cult? Some circles of Jews were apparently so caught up in their 

grief over the loss of the Temple that they could not react. 

     Others, however, most notably the nascent rabbinic

movement, found means to continue Jewish life. They DREW ON 

and ELEVATED the importance of those biblical rites which did not

require sacrifices and tried to make other religious rituals

independent of the Temple cult and its sacrificial rites. This

was a SLOW process, and all the stages are not clear, especially

because the earliest rabbinic sources were edited considerably

after the events. The MOST important and EARLIEST of these

rabbinic texts is the MISHNAH, edited in about 200 A.D, after the

failure of the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome in 135 AD. 

     The failure of the Second Jewish Revolt dashed any remaining

hope of rebuilding the Temple or re-instituting its cultic forms.

     By 200 AD., the necessity of the rabbinic approach for Jews

was confirmed. Since the Mishnah was not compiled until about

200, it is difficult to be sure what was originally proposed as a

temporary solution and what was suggested (whether after the

Temple's destruction in 70 or whether after the failure of the

Second Jewish Revolt) for the long term (See M.J.Cook, "Judaism,

Early Rabbinic," in Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, Abingdon, 

1976, pp.499-504).

(I ASK THE READ TO NOTE AGAIN THE LAST 

PARAGRAPHS ABOVE - Keith Hunt)

     Several scholars, have noted teachings in the Mishnah that

explicitly free ritual acts from the Temple cult, but they also

note Mishnaic texts that make a CHANGE without explicitly

acknowledging it. Indeed, most of the Mishnah is written as if

religious life in general underwent no changes. Based on this

phenomenon, Jacob Neusner attributes to the Mishnah an a

historical and timeless view of reality (Jacob Neusner, Judaism:

The Evidence of the Mishnah, Chicago University Press, 1981).

     A CLOSE STUDY, however, reveals that the laws of the Mishnah

INTRODUCED fundamental CHANGES. In the case of the Passover

ritual, the Mishnah reworks the domestic version of the Passover

observance, as described in Exodus 12 (before the establishment

of the Temple in Jerusalem). It TRANSFORMS what the BIBLE

describes as a DOMESTIC, sacrificial meal into a NON-sacrificial

SEDER. It does this EXTREMELY SUBTLY. 

     For example, it equates eating unleavened bread and bitter

herbs with the sacrifice, teaching that the unleavened bread and

bitter herbs comprise the festival's three essentials. Because

these two remain viable irrespective of the existence of a Temple

cult, the biblical rite can become independent of the sacrifice

(Alon, The Jews in Their Land, pp.261-265).

(AH, PLEASE NOTE what is beginning to take place here 

by the laws of the Mishnah - Keith Hunt)

     Moreover, by SUGGESTING that Jews outside the Temple in the

pre-70 period had a meal WITHOUT the Passover offering, it

creates a pre-70 precedent for the NEW protocol WITHOUT the

sacrifice. The Mishnah therefore writes as if the NEW rituals

were the STANDARD pre-70 practice - anachronistically reading

back into history rituals that had NOT YET been adopted. To

appreciate how this is done requires a close critical reading of

the texts. 

     But it is CLEAR that this in fact occurred. This REWORKING

of history, as it were, was undoubtedly intended to convince Jews

that they should believe or feel that what they were doing

pursuant to Mishnaic rules was religiously viable.

     The Mishnah also introduced a change in the thrust of the

Exodus story. This is reflected in the Mishnah's instruction that

one "starts with the disgrace [section of the Bible, which, e.g.,

narrates Israel's slavery] and ends with the glory, and expounds

[the biblical section] from 'A Wandering Aramean was my father'

(Deuteronomy 26:5), until he finishes the entire portion." 

     The best part of the requirement entails reviewing the

essential message of Passover - the freeing of the Israelites

from Egyptian slavery. The participants are to narrate Israel's

history from its "ignominious" origins to its praiseworthy state.

     Such a retelling would not be unusual even in a pre-70

sacrificial rite. But the latter part of the quoted passage

prescribes a novel feature, the exposition of the classic

biblical text of Israel's early history. That text in effect

asserts that Israel continues to experience the divine bounty 

and redemption. 

     This activity will enable the participants to derive new

meaning from the biblical account of redemption from slavery.

Leading people to focus on the ongoing promise of redemption was

made especially prominent by the rabbis after the tragedy of 70

AD.

     While the Mishnah speaks of eating the Passover offering,

the unleavened bread and bitter herbs, the latter two, as we have

noted, are equated with the sacrifice. Overcoming the sense of

the physical loss of the Passover offering is further developed

in the Mishnah's symbolic explanation for each of the foods: 

     As the Mishnah explains, the Passover offering is made

because the Lord passed over the houses of the Israelites, the

bitter herbs are eaten because the Egyptians embittered their

lives and the unleavened bread is eaten because the Lord 

redeemed his people. NOTE the unleavened bread has 

REPLACED the Passover sacrifice in conveying the notion 

of REDEMPTION. The text continues: (on the post-Mishniac 

glosses to this passage  and the change in the sequence of C.1-3, 

see Bokser, Origins).

     "Therefore we are obligated to give thanks, to prise, to

     glorify, to crown, to exalt, to elevate the One who did for

     us all these miracles and took us out of slavery to freedom,

     and let us say before Him Hallelujah."

     After the Roman destruction of the Temple, the Mishnah

restructured the biblical observance of Passover.

     The symbolic interpretation of the three foods, giving

significance to what they represent rather than to the literal

act of eating, provides a means of relating to them without their

physical presence being consequential. The symbolic meaning of

the unleavened bread, redemption, leads to the religious

consequence of recognizing redemption: One must give thanks to

God by singing the appropriate biblical psalms and by reciting a

blessing formula. This reminds the people of past bounty so as to

make them realize that they continue to experience it in the

present.

     This, in effect, RESTRUCTURES the biblical practice. Instead

of Levites or other experts singing during the slaughtering of

the paschal lamb, ordinary people - without experts - are to

offer thanksgiving even without the sacrifice. Since God

continues to redeem Israel, Israel still experiences the divine

presence.

     In still another passage, the sages, Rabbi Tarfon - and

Rabbi Aqiva, differ over the proper blessing to close these

thanksgiving praises to God:

     "And [one] seals with [the term for] redemption. Rabbi

     Tarfon says, '... Who has redeemed us and redeemed our

     ancestors from Egypt and brought us to this night - and

     [one] does not seal [with a concluding formula].'" "R.Aqiva

     says, [One adds to the blessing:] 'Thus 0 Lord, our God and

     God of our ancestors, bring us in peace to the approaching

     festivals which are coming to meet us, happy in the building

     of your city, [so as] to eat from the Passover and festive

     offerings whose blood will reach the wall of your altar with

     favor, and let us thank You for our redemption. Praised art

     thou, 0 Lord, who redeems [or redeemed] Israel'"

     (Mishnah, Pesahim 10:6).

     Taron and especially Aqiva refer not simply to a past

redemption but to an ongoing redemption. In the mention of a hope

for the "building of Your city," the Jews in the post-70 period

were provided with a firm foundation of hope for future

redemption. In the post-Mishmic period this thought was

considerably expanded on; in contrast, at this point the message

speaks of the future in terms of the continued presence of God

who redeems and only in passing alludes to the loss of the

Temple. But the hope for the future is clear, and this

RESTRUCTURING reflects a transformation caused by the reality 

of life (without the Temple), which contradicts the meaning of the

rite as a pilgrimage festival celebrating national redemption.

     The holiday has taken on a NEW dimension, reaching back to

the pre-Temple perspective of Exodus 12, EMPHASIZING the 

MEAL  as a family gathering independent of any national cult. 

But the NEW rite also deals with the hope of future redemption 

by channelling it into the experience of the SEDER.

     This pattern accords with a feature of rituals in general.

As historians of religion have noted, rituals are often designed

to respond to and overcome the contradictions of life. On the one

hand, the anxiety and disappointment caused by unachievable

ideals are temporarily eased by the experience of the ritual,

where one feels integrated with ones fellow celebrants and in

effect - at that moment - redeemed; on the other hand, a person

there receives a taste of the ideal so that he or she may try to

achieve it in daily life.

     By this process and in this way the Mishnah has REWORKED 

the DOMESTIC observance described in Exodus 12 into something 

QUITE DIFFERENT, making a sacrificial meal INTO a SEDER. 

This was done in response to the religious crisis presented by the 

Temple's destruction.

     The Mishnah characteristically focuses not on the trauma but

on what was necessary in order to deal with that trauma, in

effect working through the religious and psychological problem.

     This is in accord with the outlook of the Mishnah as a

whole, as suggested by Jacob Neusner (Neusner, Judaism, The

Evidence).

     While the Mishnah nowhere CLAIMS it is TRANSFORMING 

the earlier heritage, a CAREFUL reading of the text indicates that,

in FACT, it is. Emotionally it may have been too difficult openly

to acknowledge this change; memories of the Temple were still too

vivid to state cavalierly that it and its sacrificial system were

being replaced. Moreover, the rabbis were trying to convince

others and themselves that the new procedures were religiously

viable and desired by God. 

     Anachronism provided them, as it has other religious

thinkers through the centuries, with a creative and positive

means to move forward. As Alan Mina aptly put it:

     "Alarmed at the effect the loss would have on the people,

     the rabbis made believe that there had been no rupture, and

     that the institutions they created or adapted had always

     existed .... It is a fascinating idea, and one that goes

     some way toward accounting for how traditions originate in

     untraditional practices and why fictions are sometimes

     necessary to give these new traditions power and secure

     their acceptance" (Alan Mintz, review of Baruch M.Bosker,

     Origins of the Seder, in The New Republic, April 22, 1985,

     p.42).

     Let us return now m the Last Supper. The meal that Jesus and

his disciples would have eaten on the eve of Passover was the

SACRIFICIAL meal ... NOT a seder as we know it. It would have

FOCUSED on the sacrifice and celebrated the Exodus. It would NOT,

however, have looked to a future redemption, as the post-70 seder

did.

     In all four gospels, Jesus and his disciples go to Jerusalem

for the Passover observance, standard practice of all good Jews

who were able to make the journey. In a city crowded with

pilgrims, it was doubtless difficult to find a place where Jesus

and his disciples could gather to eat the sacrificial meal. Jesus

instructs his disciples, as recorded in the Gospel of Mark:

     "'Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the

     Passover?' And he sent two of his disciples, and said to

     them, 'Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water

     will meet you; follow him, and wherever he enters, say to

     the householder, The Teacher says, Where is my guest room,

     where I am to eat the Passover with my disciples? And he

     will show you a large upper room furnished and ready, there

     prepare for us.' And the disciples set out and went to the

     city, and found it as he had told them; and they prepared

     the Passover" (Mark 14:12-16).

     During the Last Supper, food is "dipped" and wine is drunk,

but this does not tell us much in terms of Passover observance.

True, at a SEDER wine is drunk and food is dipped in other

food, but this was true at other banquets and, for some, even at

ordinary meals. Moreover, the special dipping at the SEDER

originally involved the bitter herbs, which were dipped into a

special concoction called haroset (Haroset is still served at

Passover seders. Recipes any in different parts of the world, but

they always include chopped fruit and nuts, often bound together

with wine and seasoned with spices).

     

     Thus, there is nothing in the gospel description that

indicates that the Last Supper was a rabbinic SEDER, rather than

the TRADITIONAL SACRIFICIAL meal held at the time....

     The rabbis did their RESTRUCTURING in a manner that FIT

their NEED to demonstrate that Judaism could continue after the

destruction of the Temple, to show that the God of Israel still

related to Israel, and that Israel could still experience God and

find favor in God's eyes....

                      .................

     

Sorry, the article I have does not have the author's name on it.

If anyone can give me this information, I will be pleased to add

it to the head of the article.

Thanks to a gentleman in Michigan by the name of Mike Phillips, 

you now have the name of the author of this study. Thank you

Mike, from the Church of God Sabbatarian, greatly appreciated.

As the author has said, there is nothing in the Bible to indicate

the Passover meal or supper of the Old Testament was anything

close to the SEDER meal of the Mishnah and that observed by the

Jews of today. As shown, the CENTRAL element of the Old Testament

Passover was the killing and eating of the lamb. As to all the

other things done, in their order, and whatever words spoken for

each, at the Jewish SEDER meal, there is no evidence of any of

this for that which was observed in the true Old Testament

Passover meal, as observed by God's true children from Moses to

the time of Christ.

And under the inspiration of the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians

11, God's children under the New Covenant gather together NOT 

to observe the Lord's supper, but to do as Paul was instructed by

the Lord Himself, and observe the remembrance of Jesus' death on

the NIGHT He was betrayed, the beginning of the 14th of Nisan,

with bread and the fruit of the vine.

Jesus is our PASSOVER (1 Cor. 5). He is the LAMB of God that takes

away the sins of the world. The New Testament Passover is NOT the

Lord's supper, but is still the Passover. Jesus through His sacrifice, 

shed blood and broken body on the cross, covers, PASSES OVER, 

our sins. It is the blood of the true Passover Lamb, that makes it 

possible that death shall not come nigh to us - Keith Hunt

Entered on my Website - April 2004