Who Is Allah?

Who Is Allah?

There are 256289 comments on the The Brussels Journal story from Aug 24, 2007, titled Who Is Allah?. In it, The Brussels Journal reports that:

“Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will name God Allah? [...] What does God care what we call him?”

From the desk of Soeren Kern on Fri, 2007-08-24 11:56 Europeans love to mock the salience of religion in American society. via The Brussels Journal

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Brussels Journal.

Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197908 Dec 29, 2013
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
TheTorah is most specific about this here is the actual first hand translation from HaTorah(The Her Story): "(and G-D said, "let US make Adam in OUR IMAGE, after OUR LIKENESS, They shall rule over the fish in the sea, the birds of the sky, and over the animal, the whole earth, and every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth. so G-D created Adam in HIS IMAGE, in The Image of G-D HE created HIM; male and female HE created Them.
G-D blessed Them, and G-D said to Them, "be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it: and rule over the fish in the sea, the bird of the sky, and every living thing that moves on the earth. ")"
this specificly tells you there are two attributes of G-D, as HOO VHEE(HE AND SHE) and that Adam is Yeshooah Hoo VHee(YHVH). The-Trinity is too simple, FATHER,MOTHER,BABY. you see this male female duality, in all the names of G-D. El-SHADDAE, ELO-HEEM. SHADDAEE And HEEM are both Feminine. EL And ELO are Masculine. YH is Male VH is Feminine, all Singular Male Singular Female Plural.
and so far this story of the one called jesus, is going exactly the same as the one for Adam. virgin birth, starts tending to the garden, is all alone, so G-D says it is not good for jesus* to be alone, I will make a helper corresponding to Him. so G-D has jesus put to death some how. and nobody can figure out what happens next.
but the very first definition of any one in TheTorah, is The Definition of HaMosheeach.
and yeah you could be right, with all those Feminine endings to TheName of G-D. saving the best, for last. makes sense, to have feminine ending to The Story. but of course this could be rather hard, on all the male egos in this world. with their abusing and ignoring the women, without realizing they are insulting The IMAGE of G-D.
thanks for bothering to explain some things. Look, rabbee, the Trinity is not what you think "father mother and baby"
in the christian belief the trinity is just the three hypostases of God, "father , Jesus and HOly spirit" all three one God.

hard to comprehend I know.

other than that I am at a disadvantage here not knowing hebrew I cant comprehend the subtleties of the language I am aware the great power of language and words but.. how can I agree or disagree? I can only hear what you say .

so.. YHWH , you say is YHVH and that comprises Yehooshooa and VH=female??

one more point. Why did god made Adam and Eve a male /female pair but had to have jesus killed because he needed a partner? that doesnt make much sense to me

I am confused. I do get something though. You re referring to a well known notion of duality in everything in nature +/_, male /female. light/darkness , yin /yang .. ok.
This duality , however , more often than not implies some rivalry too, two opposites.
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197909 Dec 29, 2013
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
ok Nina! that was great.;)))
I was rolling on the floor when i first heard it thinking "poor Adam what a lousy bargain he got "
I am convinced that God likes pranks . we should be careful what we ask for cause ..you know.. we might even get exactly what we ask for.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#197910 Dec 29, 2013
Nina Q wrote:
<quoted text>
as I dont claim to know the insides of religions in depth I appreciate any new insight into them , the details that make all the difference. Just like I thought that messiah was exactly what it's called in hebrew and Eric enlightened me now I m learning there's a difference in mashiah and moshiah I guess in greek the messiah came to be a combination ( of meanings).Very in nteresting.
remains a mystery to be discovered what is the theological difference between the two in hebrew holy books . Is there an expectation of one mashiah =annointed king and another expectation of some other moshiah =saviour? I 'll have to read Shamma's article in detail.
any help from you people who know better will be precious
have a good day Frijoles and everyone here
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Theol...

The idea of savior is very different in Judaism vs Christianity. Saviorism (i.e. deliverance) comes from God, and not from another person. Hence no original sin theology. The word Messiah is from moshiach (annoited), not from yeshua (savior). In other words, the moshiach (messiah) is not a savior. That is a Christian idea. In most of the literature, the moshiach comes as result of messianic events, not as an instigator, hence the moshiach is not a savior.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#197911 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You did not read my comment properly.
John 17:5 is silly and a forgery, added in later by some other John.
You can see it is an absurd conditional request. No person can ask God to glorify him. Glory belongs only to God and God gave glory to no one. You would have known that if you have read the Hebrew Scriptures.
Isaiah 6:3 ... The whole earth is filled with his glory! "melo kol ha'arretz"

I.E. its already a done deal

However, one can still ask God to sanctify (kedushano) themselves. In Judaism, this is almost always asked in the plural, and it is implied that this act is a partnership.
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197912 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
History has always been written by the powerful and the victors who vanquished others. The writers of the Church wrote most of the history of Jews for the Church.
Normally the vanquished always look up to the victor and copy the victor. However, the Jews were different. They did not copy the Church, who was the victor. They still have their own history.
I have only heard Christians yelling about YHWH but I have not heard a single Jew yell out those initials.
If Elohim were plural, all translators of the forged document OT, would have written "Gods said,'Let there be .........." through out Genesis 1.
The Christian Grammar is horrible, atrocious and absurd!
This is one fact which NO Christian polemicist and apologist can deny!
I really don't know why Christian posters, excluding dear HughBe, ARE sooooo dumb?
Question time: What came first? Language or Grammar?
you wanna play bmz? there's a more intriguing question. what came first? the chicken or the egg?

and.. there's no "christian grammar" or language

christians dont yell say YHWH , I for example , am trying to use a name as jewish people use it out of respect , trying to use some terms their way. I cant type "G-od" cause I find it 1. difficult to type 2. unnecessary since we all know it is for God

I dont even bother to type it wth a capital G I m trying to do so to please some people who might find god offensive as if it had any different meaning.( pay tribute wth a capital G or you might think I m referring to Zeus ):)

Allah comes easy and again out of respect.

my god needs no capitals he knows he's above all us and next to us sometimes within us and he s way too tolerant And we take advantage of him ( well, "him", for convenience) any way we can.

so.. YHVH, God, Allah just to keep analogies that's all.

and last and most important: you wrote:
<<If Elohim were plural, all translators of the forged document OT, would have written "Gods said,'Let there be .........." through out Genesis 1.>>

once again I m telling you forget what they WOULD HAVE DONE--you cant build an argument os SPECULATIONS- and focus on what they really DID.
and the Septuagint chose NOT to convey the plural in Greek from which Greek it spread all over.
and they did it ON PURPOSE.
and so the story took on another direction.

Greeks didnt mind that plurality concealed and turned into singular you know why ? Because they already had their own mythology there was no need to delve into Genesis to detect the many gods that were "in office" back then and even further back deep in human history .

in plain english greeks kept their pantheon separate in mythology while the jewish mythology is unavoidably incorporated in the OT. That's not bad it's what it is. And Greeks back then little minded what was in Genesis for now they were moving ahead to new directions new discoveries and that was a magical sometimes bloody adventure.==> New Testament
but.. scripta manent and the truth always finds a way to sneak into what we'd like to present as obvious.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#197913 Dec 29, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Things do not happen just because people "believe" them.
You have to have proof that Gospels were written by the Apostles of Jesus.
What happened on the day of Pentecost, no one knows. Not a single word of what the "Supposed Holy Ghost" taught Disciples of Jesus is recorded!!
But "every one received the so called Holy Ghost inside them" (what that means, no one is ever able to tell).
People who are dumb, dumber and dumbest are those who believe in all this without any proof.
You are a dumb Muslim!
All the disciple received the Holy Spirit giving them the power to perform miracles the same as Jesus.
Even Paul was given the power to heal the sick.
Even Peter raised up a dead women from the dead.
The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of The Father and Jesus that comes forth from the Father and the Son and dwells in the body of those who receive them.
That is what the disciples received from God at Pentecost, and were empowered by the Holy Spirit with full knowledge of Gods truth.
Jesus said I am with always even till the end of times.
Meaning His Spirit dwells within their body.

The early days of the church were a time of phenomenal growth and apostolic miracles. In Acts 5:15-16 we read,“People brought the sick into the streets and laid them on beds and mats so that at least Peter’s shadow might fall on some of them as he passed by. Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by evil spirits, and all of them were healed.”

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Peter-shadow.html...
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197914 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Your own OT, a forged copy of the Hebrew Scriptures, confirms the men had left.
Genesis 18 RSVCE: "16 Then the men set out from there,"
And here is the master blaster just a little ahead: "22 So the men turned from there, and went toward Sodom; but Abraham still stood before the Lord. 23 Then Abraham drew near, and said,“Wilt thou indeed destroy the righteous with the wicked?"
That two men went away and the third remained there, is absurd! LMAO!
For Hebrew, please refer to this: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0118.htm
The Greek language of the Christian texts is the culprit, which has ruined the scripture. I do not discuss through Greek and Latin. I consider them languages unfit and extremely poor for scripture.
After the men had left, the LORD was still there in Abraham's vision and the negotiations went on.
If you do not wish to learn from me, then at least read your own books. You will never be clueless then.
no it's not absurd. it's a logical inference although I will admit it's not clear as to how many they were after all.

sure thing is someone was left behind.
read please and note that the "complete jewish bible " is what google gave me

<<18 Adonai appeared to Avraham by the oaks of Mamre as he sat at the entrance to the tent during the heat of the day. 2 He raised his eyes and looked, and there in front of him stood three men.

so far we can only understand they were all three Adonai included

<<18:16
16 The men set out from there and looked over toward S’dom, and Avraham went with them to see them on their way. 17 Adonai said,“Should I hide from Avraham what I am about to do,..>
so it's either adonai stayed behind or Abraham saw the off "went with them to see them..etc"
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...
but further down ..
19
<<19 (iii) The two angels came to S’dom that evening, when Lot was sitting at the gate of S’dom. Lot saw them, got up to greet them and prostrated himself on the ground.>
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

but here rises one question Regarldless of how many they were or if one stayed behind

so now they are two in Sodoma? two angels?
I m sure angels is what the septuagint translated in Greek.
the "men" became "angels"
but anyway they were two. that woulod mean that Adonai was left behind,were they angels was/were they Adonai who could eat bread looked like men anyway ?

so much so that the Sodoma people wanted sex with them ? wow!! if Adonai is God that god can really change himself into ahuman being who eats walks talks.. strange isnt it ?

well if God Adonai angels etc can walk talk eat and inspire we might just as well understand that God can even be crucified - if he happens to look so tremendously like a man.!
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#197915 Dec 29, 2013
Nina Q wrote:
<quoted text>
for people to decide about Paul's teaching you should at least have bothered to provide the particular points you or the writer of what you're copy/pasting found so.. unconvincing.
where are they ? I see what you copy /pasted was a general denial of the man just because you like it so but no particular point to support your claim.
so what is the problem really about Paul never quotin Jesus? truth is he never really heard him speak. Paul never lied that he heard or saw Jesus in the flesh. Bravo to him he didnt lie.
hm.. what else? you call him a traitor? from whose point of view was he a traitor? the jewish point of view? or the islamic point of view?

Mohamed?
For many days I am posting on this thread what Paul wrote and how different it is from what Jesus told.

You can go thru these and post your reply.

In case of scripture, first you have to prove the authenticity of any book, who wrote it, how it was preserved and transmitted.

Unless these things are proven to be correct to a reasonable degree, they shall be suspect.

For any one to "faithfully transmit" teachings of Jesus, at least he should have learned something from Jesus or became disciple of the chosen disciple of Jesus.

Both these things are missing in the case of Paul, so one has to be very careful while accepting any teaching from him.

And when we see they are so different from what jesus said or did in his life time, it is strange that people accept it without questioning.

Think it with a cool mind and you will see the light.
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#197916 Dec 29, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>You are a dumb Muslim!
All the disciple received the Holy Spirit giving them the power to perform miracles the same as Jesus.
Do you know any thing except name calling?

The Disciples were given power to Heal the Sick and take out Evil Spirits, DURING the time when Jesus was alive!!

Read your Gospel, when jesus sent his disciple outside, he gave them these powers.

If some one has to be DUMB, it has to be you!!
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197917 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the first Christian, who has agreed and accepted that there are absurd verses in your Bible.
Thanks a million. I see some progress!
there may be but in this case we were talking about the absurd verses in the QUARAN not the OT. or the NT,.

the Quran we were talking about.

you're welcome and let me thank you in turn for admitting that there other absurd verses in the Quran except for the one I wrote.
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#197918 Dec 29, 2013
Nina Q wrote:
<quoted text>
why do you feel the need to call people dumb dumber and dumbest because they believe something you will not comprehend?
..
Have you read the post in whose answer I replied....have you seen any of their post calling me names?

Why do you not protest to the other side?

We can have civlized discussions, without demonizing each other.

We might understand or not understand each other, but we should avoid speaking harshly and in gutter language.

Look at the posts of people who do not agree with Islam or teachings of Quran, what type of belligerent language and tone they use.

We do not accept what St. Paul wrote, but do we speak bad word about him? We criticise him on his logic, reasoning and teaching and the source from where he got this info.

All these are relevant topics and one has right to discuss them.

If you have any thing against Quran or teachings of our prophet, you should present them in a civlized manner.

That is proper way for any discussion to go thru, not in the way these people want to conduct it.

Now coming to the subject, Son of God, Holy Spirit and sin....all these words were used by Jews for centuries before jesus.

It was St. Paul who gave these words "special meaning" and used them in a sense which was never used by jews.

Since St. Paul's letters were the earliest of all NT material, so the other gospel writers (most of whom were influenced by Paul) used them in that strange sense.

In OT we hear the words like Son of God, begotten Son of God, Holy Spirit etc, but no Jew interprets it in the sense in which Christians understand it.

So it is the problem with Christians' interpretation of these words and not in these words themselves.

Son of God and Begotten Son of God should be interpreted in allegorical sense and not in literal sense, Holy Ghost is no one but an angel of God.

Every thing will fit in place , once you get your basics right.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#197919 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
No. There is no such verse in Qur'aan about Muhammad being light.
No man existed before Adam, not even Jesus. That somebody existed as Light or a Word before Adam, is silly, idiotic and absurd.
Wrong!
This narration is the symbol of the light of Muhammad.
The Quran does not exist without the examples of the life of Muhammad as the light of the world.
Some Muslims claim that we should only be following the Qur'an and neglect the Sunnah. This is very wrong, and clearly shows that these people have not understood the Qur'an. It's important to read and understand the Qur'an, and it is just as important to know how Muhammad (SAW) lived according to it. The Qur'an is the Final Revelation from Allah, the Sunnah are The Ways of the Final Messenger of Allah (SAW), so knowledge should be taken from both sources.

The verses in the Quran that says Muhammad is just a man made from clay like Adam is a contradiction by Allah.
For Allah does not say we should follow the examples of the Prophet Adam, nor does Allah say we should emulate the life of all the prophets.
Allah says Muslims are to obey Muhammad.
So Allah makes Muhammad the light of the world as an example for all humans to emulate.
All the good and evil deeds Muhammad did in his life is the path Allah proscribed humans to perform making Muhammad the light of the world.

And Muslims murdering innocent people are performing to the will of Allah by emulating the evil deeds committed by Muhammad.

That is the insanity of the Muslim god Allah!
And in life Muslims express the insanity of their god Allah.
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197920 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
No. There is no such verse in Qur'aan about Muhammad being light.
No man existed before Adam, not even Jesus. That somebody existed as Light or a Word before Adam, is silly, idiotic and absurd.
no such verse in the quran but there is such a verse in islamic literature. Islam's books no ?
do you think some bad evil christian wrote those verses?
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197921 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
In the verse, sons of God simply means the rich and the powerful men were grabbing girls and screwing them.
Angels do not have dicks. God also does not have a dick. Right?
ahahaaa

so the sons of God? Were the sons of God /gods/Elohim some men who became powerful and grabbed girls and.. chewed ?
God had men as sons? awwwwe!!
you're making progress!!
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197922 Dec 29, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Paul's letters were the FIRST of all NT materials, so if we find any thing in Gospels that "somehow" matches with the arguments of Paul, it means that they got it from Paul and not vice versa.
This is what I was trying to convey.... the language is confusing, like some one trying to explain Trinity in "logical" way!!
ok, so that's what you meant to say . ok So!
Can you give me a verse in Paul's letters that says what Jesus said in John such as.

"before Abraham was I AM"

and why is it logical for you to conclude in certainty that John's gospel incorporated what paul had said first and it's absurd to accept that it was Paul who repeated what he said about Jesus after he had believed in him , studied him got divinely inspired him and things like that?

and why do you expect me to accept what you say but dont want me to use the same logic -and certainty- that the Quran was first written by somebody and then it was attributed to Mohamed?

or that no matter what Mohamed had said NO ONE is sure that the scribes really put down the real words of Mohamed?
what proof have you got that what Mohamed said was exactly what the scribes wrote. There's no proof whatsoever . just good will. But no proof.

the wonderful thing about chrsitianity is that there are sources about the same person ( JEsus) and his teaching. No matter the minor differences which only are natural and prove that it was not a well orchestrated scheme so that it would appear that many say EXACTLY tha same things about Jesus, the crux the basics about Jesus essence are identical . In essence. Not in form.

But we have to take Mohamed's word for whatever was written in the Quran and yet it was not even written down -on the spot- by him!!!

why would I accept it? There s no other to testify that the scribes wrote exactly what mohamed had said and there's no one to testify that Mohamed said what he had been told and anyway there's no one to testify that Mohamed was really told some things by the anger and anyway who's gonna testify who that angel was?

no witness, no testimony no credibility LIke you said.. till it's proven it's suspicious.

that's how logic works Both ways . all ways .
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197923 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
I can say that even without knowing a word of Latin and Greek. As a language of a people, it is ok. I am only saying that the scripture should not have been written in it as it is poor and unfit for the Scripture.
You wrote: "I can create new words any minute I want."
Thank you for saying that. That is exactly what the men, who penned the gospels and letters of the New Testament and founded Christianity, DID every time.
They came up with absurd words such as incarnation, hypo-static union and other absurd words, which had no place in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Frankly speaking, I crack up every time someone talks about Jesus being the Alpha and the Omega. Those are just the first and last alphabets of Greek.
In Hebrew Scriptures, God referred to himself as "the First and the Last". This is where the Greek translators, being zero in understanding Hebrew, did not know what it really meant.
So, they took it to mean the first and the last alphabet of Hebrew.
Alef is the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet and Tav is the last.
So, going by that, your Jesus was "the Alef and the Tav". See how hilarious does it sound!
In reality, "The first and the last" means "forever". It is silly and idiotic to say that Jesus was A and Zee.
"I am the first and I am the last" simply means, "I am forever" and that was declared by God.
If Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, then he is not many alphabets in between and that means he is not many other things. lol!
Read, study and learn!
first , between the Alpha and the Wmega there are not many alphabets there are only letters All letters together make u what you know as the Alphabet
The Alpha and the Wmega be it the Alef and Tav means exactly from beginning Alpha to the end Wmega/ so in this respect from beginning to end is much better and much more meaningful to mean forever than the first and the last

second. I can make any word I need to express new subtle meanings but that's because I know Greek very well. the Septuagint were Hebrews and they did not coin any new word in greek. After all the words God theos and Gods =theoi existed in greek long before the septuagint. it still remains unanswered why the scribes chose to translate the plural Elohim into the greek singular theos or angel or lord =kyrios etc instead of the plural forms. They would need to coin no plural form it was there and very well known to greeks considering they had many godS

so dont get angry with the greek language if you dont like this trick take it out on the hebrew scribes who chose to translate in singular greek form what was so obviously a hebrew plural

funny thing is that detail escaped Mohamed or whoever whispered Allah's truths to him . and he went back to hebrew plural when he didnt cleverly avoided the "we" in our image and our likeness detail.

Mohamed would have known better if he had studied Hebrew himself rather than repeat what he had been told. before he ventured to make the new recipe that only brought back to surface what the septuagint had tried to .."change"
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197924 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That was brilliant, MUQ!
Very true and under Paul's Galatians 1:8 clause, all the writers of gospels stand accursed and condemned because he preached none of theirs.
"Galatians 1:8 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel [a]contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
Another version:
"Galatians 1:8 New Century Version (NCV)
8 We preached to you the Good News. So if we ourselves, or even an angel from heaven, should preach to you something different, we should be judged guilty!"
What do we do now? Who should be judged guilty? I say we judge all of them guilty!
Salaams
BMZ
so what does that prove ? it proves a nice beautiful hole in the water but other than the hole in the water what does it prove to you and you're cheerng that loud? I can only focus on the "angel" preaching to someone who recited it later and much later some others put it down in black and white.

in that respect you might even call him a PRO PHET! who foretold about some angels to come and whisper things to some ears with no witness at all.

what else did Paul write that you can go cheering like a happy boy about ?
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197925 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
I am surprised to know that John's Satanic book calmed you down. Lucky you did not read John's Revelation horror and crap, which could have killed you. Stay away from that drug store.
by far the most spiritual account of what jesus was all about of all gospelsNot only calmed me down but also gave me the mental and psychic TOLERANCE to go on with Quran.

THAT GOOD !!

and the Revelation . ok I started it, read through some part , got freaked out stopped and some time later I went through it all. I dont remember it now cause luckily no one obliges me to recite verses of horror by heart!

I do remember though that both Jesus and God said the same thing in the Revelation :

I am the Alpha and the Wmega !
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197926 Dec 29, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You did not read my comment properly.
John 17:5 is silly and a forgery, added in later by some other John.
You can see it is an absurd conditional request. No person can ask God to glorify him. Glory belongs only to God and God gave glory to no one. You would have known that if you have read the Hebrew Scriptures.
so.. if John's gospel is a forgery and a whole fraud as a whole then why do you read it scrutinize it throw away what doesnt suit you and keep what you think helps you prove what you cannot prove otherwise?

THROW IT AWAY AND USE THE QURAN TO PROVE THAT MOHAMED WROTE DOWN BECAUSE HE HAD WITNESSED JESUS **NOT** SAYING HE WAS THE SON OF gOD.

use your Quran bmz you wont convince anyone by entertaining them.

and stop forging John's gospel like a good muslim you are by keeping verses discarding other verses and making an islamic "john's gospel" the old momhamedan style of mixing recipes and sprinkle some John on the "new" one.

prove me wrong please once ! once!
Nina Q

Thessaloníki, Greece

#197927 Dec 29, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you brother BMZ,
I would go slow on this Nina if I was you.
Salaam
MUQ
why slow? what's wrong wth me d'you think I m slow?

:D:D:D

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pagan/Wiccan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Harrogate mother says foster families are relig... (Nov '15) Sep 15 CDDD 55
News Speaking of religion: Pagans stir a fuss in Beebe (Jun '14) Sep 12 dirt reynolds 121
the 7 great clans (Jun '07) Sep 5 blessed 479
Rev. Mirado Crow (Sep '13) Aug '17 Nobody you know 14
News Woman Explains Why She Kept 100 Dead Cats in He... (Jun '10) Aug '17 Trump Rules Zippy 6
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Jul '17 John 4,952
Do you know where you will spend eternity? Jul '17 JacquelineDeane55 1
More from around the web