Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple...
Student

Oregon City, OR

#34277 May 10, 2013
Working for the Lord wrote:
<quoted text>
What does the bible say on how we are to worship God?
Jehovah God accepts only the worship of those who comport themselves in harmony with his will.(Mt 15:9; Mr 7:7) To a Samaritan woman Christ Jesus said:“The hour is coming when neither in this mountain [Gerizim] nor in Jerusalem will you people worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know ... Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him. God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.”—Joh 4:21-24.

The words of Jesus clearly showed that true worship would not depend upon the presence or use of visible things and geographic locations. Instead of relying on sight or touch, the true worshiper exercises faith and, regardless of the place or things about him, maintains a worshipful attitude. Thus he worships, not with the aid of something that he can see or touch, but with spirit. Since he has the truth as revealed by God, his worship is in agreement with the truth. Having become acquainted with God through the Bible and evidence of the operation of God’s spirit in his life, the person who worships with spirit and truth definitely ‘knows what he is worshiping.’
(it 2 Worship pp. 1211-1212))
Student

Oregon City, OR

#34278 May 10, 2013
Working for the Lord wrote:
<quoted text>
The belief that only 144,000 and the belief that we will be right here on the same earth is false..
Those whom Jesus Christ made “to be a kingdom and priests to our God” are shown as singing a new song in which they say that they were bought by Christ’s blood.(Re 5:9, 10) Further on, the ones singing the new song are enumerated as 144,000 persons “bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb.”(Re 14:1-5) Finally this underpriesthood is shown as being resurrected to heaven and joining Jesus Christ in his rule, becoming “priests of God and of the Christ” and ruling “as kings” with Christ during his Thousand Year Reign.—Re 20:4, 6.(it 2 Priest p. 687)

The key to the identification of the “great crowd” is found within the description of them in Revelation chapter 7 and in obviously parallel passages. Revelation 7:15-17 speaks of God as ‘spreading his tent over them,’ of their being guided to “fountains of waters of life,” and of God’s wiping “every tear from their eyes.” At Revelation 21:2-4 we find parallel expressions:‘God’s tent being with mankind,’ his ‘wiping every tear from their eyes,’ and ‘death being no more.’ The vision there presented is concerning persons not in heaven, from where the ‘New Jerusalem comes down,’ but on earth, among mankind.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34279 May 10, 2013
Working for the Lord wrote:
<quoted text> Sadly, there is no logic to follow at all. I studied intensely their practices and it's one of the most confusing I've ever studied. No use of blood transfusion being one that is translated incorrectly. As a former paramedic I can tell you that their explanation of using other things such as plasma, transfusing their own blood and others isn't something that can be used in emergencies and or simple procedures, it doesn't work because of time needed to help the patient effectively. They interpret the use of the passage in the old and new about eating ANIMALS or birds,
Genesis 9:4 "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.
----------
Leviticus 7:26 And wherever you live, you must not eat the blood of any bird or animal. The use of transfusing blood has saved billions of people's lives, and this with the fact that it isn't being consumed in an eating way proves their false doctrine on this subject.

This is one of my favorite JW stupidisms.

Another favorite of mine goes something like this.

Gods chosen people have always been persecuted.
JW's are persecuted.
Therefore JW's are Gods chosen people.

Of course by EXACTLY the same "logic" homosexuals are gods chosen people.

As are Jews, fat people, African-Americans, Nazi's......

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34280 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
Prior to the rejection of the Jewish nation and the end of its position as the congregation of God, Jesus Christ identified himself as the “rock-mass” upon which he would build what he termed “my congregation.”(Mt 16:18)
This is as Peter, to whom he spoke, understood matters, for the apostle later identified Jesus as the figurative “stone” that was rejected by men but was “chosen, precious, with God” and as the “foundation cornerstone” on which a person could rest his faith without disappointment.(1Pe 2:4-6; Ps 118:22; Isa 28:16) Paul also definitely identified Jesus Christ as the foundation upon which the Christian congregation is built.(Eph 2:19-22; 1Co 3:11)
And, belonging to Jehovah as it does, it is appropriately referred to as “the congregation of God.”—Ac 20:28; Ga 1:13.
This Christian congregation (Gr., ekklesia), founded on Christ, also has him as its head. Thus it is stated:“He [God] also subjected all things under his feet, and made him head over all things to the congregation, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills up all things in all.”—Eph 1:22, 23; see also Col 1:18.
The Christian congregation of God took the place of the congregation of Israel at Pentecost of 33 C.E., when holy spirit was poured out on Jesus’ followers in Jerusalem. The first prospective members of that congregation were chosen shortly after Jesus’ baptism, at the beginning of his ministry on earth.(Ac 2:1-4; Joh 1:35-43)
From among his early followers Jesus selected 12 apostles (Lu 6:12-16), and later he chose Saul of Tarsus, who became “an apostle to the nations.”(Ac 9:1-19; Ro 11:13) The 12 faithful apostles of the Lamb Jesus Christ, including Matthias who replaced Judas, constitute secondary foundations of the Christian congregation.—Ac 1:23-26; Re 21:1, 2, 14.( It 1 Congregation p. 498)

A lot of bible verses that go a LONG WAY to proving God has NOTHING to do with the Watchtower cult.

Thanks for demonstrating what lying, deceitful, hypocritical bastards the Dubs are.

Your secret plan of discrediting completely the JW cult is going well my friend.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34281 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
It can be seen that, while Jesus’ death on a torture stake plays a ...

Jesus did not die on a "torture stake". He was crucified on a cross.

Try reading a REAL bible some time.

This is another perfect example of the LIES the cult spreads. Never mind the Romans did not use impalation but DID practice crucifixion is a historical fact.

Never mind that this is a deliberate distortion of the bible.

Never mind that Satan is the father of lies and therefore, logically, is the father of the Watchtower cult.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34282 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
Jehovah God ...
I have already proved that "Jehovah" is a best a horrible error that has been propagated by ignorant people and (more likely) is inspired by Satan.

Causing people to forget the true name of God DOES sound like something that would interest Satan.

Student

Oregon City, OR

#34283 May 10, 2013
Working for the Lord wrote:
<quoted text> Sadly, there is no logic to follow at all. I studied intensely their practices and it's one of the most confusing I've ever studied. No use of blood transfusion being one that is translated incorrectly. As a former paramedic I can tell you that their explanation of using other things such as plasma, transfusing their own blood and others isn't something that can be used in emergencies and or simple procedures, it doesn't work because of time needed to help the patient effectively. They interpret the use of the passage in the old and new about eating ANIMALS or birds,
Genesis 9:4 "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.
----------
Leviticus 7:26 And wherever you live, you must not eat the blood of any bird or animal. The use of transfusing blood has saved billions of people's lives, and this with the fact that it isn't being consumed in an eating way proves their false doctrine on this subject.
God’s law on blood certainly is not new or unclear. Through our common forefather Noah, Jehovah commanded all mankind:“Flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”(Genesis 9:4) The sacredness of blood, representing life from God, was stressed in the Mosaic Law. Blood could be used on the altar, but otherwise it was to be ‘poured out on the ground as water.’(Leviticus 17:11-14; Deuteronomy 12:23-25)

Did the prohibition against sustaining life with blood continue after the Mosaic Law ended? Absolutely. At what some might call the first Christian council, the apostles and older men (who comprised the governing body) concluded that Christians must ‘abstain from idolatry, from fornication, from what is strangled [having blood left in] and from blood.’ Misuse of blood was as serious a moral wrong as illicit sex relations.

Acts 15:19-21, 28, 29-
19 Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, 20 but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!”

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34284 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
Those whom Jesus Christ made “to be a kingdom and priests to our God” are shown as singing a new song in which they say that they were bought by Christ’s blood.(Re 5:9, 10) Further on, the ones singing the new song are enumerated as 144,000 persons “bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb.”(Re 14:1-5) Finally this underpriesthood is shown as being resurrected to heaven and joining Jesus Christ in his rule, becoming “priests of God and of the Christ” and ruling “as kings” with Christ during his Thousand Year Reign.—Re 20:4, 6.(it 2 Priest p. 687)
The key to the identification of the “great crowd” is found within the description of them in Revelation chapter 7 and in obviously parallel passages. Revelation 7:15-17 speaks of God as ‘spreading his tent over them,’ of their being guided to “fountains of waters of life,” and of God’s wiping “every tear from their eyes.” At Revelation 21:2-4 we find parallel expressions:‘God’s tent being with mankind,’ his ‘wiping every tear from their eyes,’ and ‘death being no more.’ The vision there presented is concerning persons not in heaven, from where the ‘New Jerusalem comes down,’ but on earth, among mankind.

In other words you have not the first clue as to what the 144,000 means.

Then why all the double talk and verses out of context. Just admit your ignorance.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34285 May 10, 2013
Armageddon is a figurative war, not a literal war.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34286 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
God’s law on blood certainly is not new or unclear. Through our common forefather Noah, Jehovah commanded all mankind:“Flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”(Genesis 9:4) The sacredness of blood, representing life from God, was stressed in the Mosaic Law. Blood could be used on the altar, but otherwise it was to be ‘poured out on the ground as water.’(Leviticus 17:11-14; Deuteronomy 12:23-25)
Did the prohibition against sustaining life with blood continue after the Mosaic Law ended? Absolutely. At what some might call the first Christian council, the apostles and older men (who comprised the governing body) concluded that Christians must ‘abstain from idolatry, from fornication, from what is strangled [having blood left in] and from blood.’ Misuse of blood was as serious a moral wrong as illicit sex relations.
Acts 15:19-21, 28, 29-
19 Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, 20 but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!”

Wow. This is some psychotic, messed up, crap.

Do you know how much The Cult has PAID out to settle wrongful death suits?

The Watchtower will pay off anyone who threatens to sue them. They will do ANYTHING to perpetuate the lies they tell.

You are so gullible. You weak little peons. You will do anything to feel loved. But your cult does not love you. You are expendable. They would rather see you die needing a blood transfusion than to admit they don't know the bible from the hole they wipe.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34287 May 10, 2013
Working for the Lord wrote:
Armageddon is a figurative war, not a literal war.

The whole book is metaphor. You really have to stretch to get anything literal out of it.
Student

Oregon City, OR

#34289 May 10, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus did not die on a "torture stake". He was crucified on a cross.
Try reading a REAL bible some time.
This is another perfect example of the LIES the cult spreads. Never mind the Romans did not use impalation but DID practice crucifixion is a historical fact.
Never mind that this is a deliberate distortion of the bible.
Never mind that Satan is the father of lies and therefore, logically, is the father of the Watchtower cult.
The book The Non-Christian Cross, by John Denham Parsons, states:“There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . it is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape.”—London, 1896, pp. 23, 24.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#34291 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
The book The Non-Christian Cross, by John Denham Parsons, states:“There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . it is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape.”—London, 1896, pp. 23, 24.

1896.......

Moron.

You are to stupid to check that assertion.

Until you are capable of embracing, rather than avoiding reality you are not going to make any progress.

Strap on a pair and do some research.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34292 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
God’s law on blood certainly is not new or unclear.
The bible speaks of not drinking it, and like any food you prepare to drain it so you will prevent consuming bacteria in the food. No where does it say it can't be consumed intravenously, as this is void of being absorbed by the intestinal tract directly. I would like to know your bible source, as I feel confidnt the source of your info is from a special edition stricty for Jehovah's Witnesses, so you can continue to believe in your religion, instead of the truth of the bible. My prayer is that something will be said to change your downward spiral, and catch you with the truth before it's to late.
New Living Translation (NLT)


11 for the life of the body is in its blood. I have given you the blood on the altar to purify you, making you right with the Lord.[a] It is the blood, given in exchange for a life, that makes purification possible. 12 That is why I have said to the people of Israel,‘You must never eat or drink blood—neither you nor the foreigners living among you.’

13 “And if any native Israelite or foreigner living among you goes hunting and kills an animal or bird that is approved for eating, he must drain its blood and cover it with earth. 14 The life of every creature is in its blood. That is why I have said to the people of Israel,‘You must never eat or drink blood, for the life of any creature is in its blood.’ So whoever consumes blood will be cut off from the community.
what it says, The June 15, 2004 issue of the Watchtower detailed the rules regarding the use of blood products. While some items remain “unacceptable,” others are a matter of conscience for each person “to decide.” For example it is “unacceptable” to use whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. However, it is a matter of choice as to whether one may use “fractions” from red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. This, of course, is quite at variance with the earlier pontification that none of “the component parts of the blood” could be used (BMLG, p. 13-14). For an analysis of the “Witnesses’” criteria for classifying blood components, see Dr. Osamu Muramoto’s article, The Watchtower Society redefines the guidelines for the use of blood products.

At the height of their glory, the first-century Pharisees were not as artful at “straining out the gnat” while “swallowing the camel,” as are the modern “Watchtower Witnesses.”

There is no prohibition, or principle, in the Bible that would condemn the transfusion of blood for necessary medical procedures. To contend otherwise is to create a law where God has not; such is both presumptuous and evil.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34293 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
God’s law on blood certainly is not new or unclear. Through our common forefather Noah, Jehovah commanded all mankind:“Flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”(Genesis 9:4) The sacredness of blood, representing life from God, was stressed in the Mosaic Law. Blood could be used on the altar, but otherwise it was to be ‘poured out on the ground as water.’(Leviticus 17:11-14; Deuteronomy 12:23-25)
Did the prohibition against sustaining life with blood continue after the Mosaic Law ended? Absolutely. At what some might call the first Christian council, the apostles and older men (who comprised the governing body) concluded that Christians must ‘abstain from idolatry, from fornication, from what is strangled [having blood left in] and from blood.’ Misuse of blood was as serious a moral wrong as illicit sex relations.
Acts 15:19-21, 28, 29-
19 Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, 20 but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!”
This is what you say, and this is what the bible says, You are not being truthful my dear friend, as it doesn't refer to the soul, here's what the bible actually says. 4 But you must never eat animals that still have their lifeblood in them. Genesis 9;4, life blood DOES NOT MEAN SOUL, it refers to the fact that nothing an animal or human cannot exsist without blood, but a human soul continues to live after death, or if all the blood is drain from them. so again your analogy is so flawed as all I can do is continue to put the truth down for you and pray you see the light. Please tell us all the bible in which you used to obtain this verse you referred to,“Flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”(Genesis 9:4) This is not said in any bible but your bible, which was created specifically for the Jehovah witnesses, this is a sin against God by adding to, which is forbidden.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34294 May 10, 2013
The Jehovah witness get their info from one bible, which is the New World Translation, created especially for one purpose and one purpose only, to distort the truth to meet and attempt to say what they believe, not what God has said. The New World Translation of the Bible is Jehovah's Witnesses own translation, no other religious group uses this Bible and Jehovah's Witnesses make very little use of other Bibles.

The translators of The New World Translation were: Nathan Knorr, Albert Schroeder, George Gangas, Fred Franz, M. Henschel

"Fred Franz was the only one with any knowledge of the Bible languages to attempt translation of this kind. He had studied Greek for two years in the University of Cincinnati but was only self-taught in Hebrew." ["Crisis of Conscience"; by Raymond Franz; Commentary Press, Atlanta; 1983 edition; footnote 15; page 50.]

Four out of the five men on the committee had no Hebrew or Greek training at all, and only a high school education. Franz studied Greek for two years at the University of Cincinnati, but dropped out after his sophomore year. When asked in a Scotland courtroom if he could translate Genesis 2:4 into Hebrew, Franz replied that he could not. The truth is that Franz was unable to translate Hebrew or Greek.

What we have is a very inexperienced translating committee that twisted Scripture to make it fit the Society's doctrine.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34295 May 10, 2013
A Grossly misleading translation ( new world translation )
Reprinted with permission


John 1:1, which reads "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God," is shockingly mistranslated, "Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god," in a New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, published under the auspices of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34299 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear Student, I hope you can see clearly that when an animal who has no soul and a human who does, lacks sufficent blood, physical death will occur, but the soul is unaffected by this depletion of blood. Again you see in this world that blood has undoubtedly saved billions of lives, if we stopped using blood, this action would be catastrophic. God in his wisdom made sure we used blood in such a way that it SAVES lives, not takes them, the key word being "SAVED", after all isn't that the entire purpose of blood in all that God speaks of throughout the entire bible.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34300 May 10, 2013
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear Student, I keep reading about blood substitutes, will they be available soon?

Despite much promising research, a true substitute for blood cells (that is, the red cells and platelets) may not be available for many years. More likely, blood transfusions will continue to become even safer because of improved blood donor screening and testing. In addition, scientists are exploring new technologies that may virtually eliminate infectious diseased from blood transfusion.

New drugs and medical techniques can sometimes significantly reduce or eliminate the need for blood transfusions. For example, most surgeries today require far less blood than just a few years ago. In another example, patients on kidney dialysis who used to need monthly blood transfusions, now take a drug that promotes red cell production in the body and virtually eliminate the need for a blood transfusion. My friend this would be wonderful not to need blood transfusions, but that's not going to happen anytime soon, but the most important thing about blood transfusion is it isn't a sin to use, it doesn't go against what God teaches, on the contrary it very much goes with what God teaches.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34301 May 10, 2013
There is no mention of limiting communion to anyone except that they examine themselves and rightly discern that the elements represent Christ's sacrifice, not a mere meal to satisfy hunger.
•"But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not judge the body rightly," (1 Cor. 11:28-29, NASB).

No place in the Bible is communion restricted to only the 144,000, as the Witnesses teach. This is a fabrication of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. The fact that the Jehovah's Witnesses do not take communion is a demonstration that they are not in the body of Christ and do not have a covenant relationship with Christ. The Lord's Supper is meant for the body of believers in the true and living God who have been redeemed by the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord's Supper is not for those who are outside the camp of Christ. Since the great majority of the Jehovah's Witnesses do not take communion, this is a testimony against them.
Acts 20:7 gives the J.W. cult no little trouble. They cannot find a single passage where any New Testament church ever observed the Lord’s Supper on the date of the Passover, but here is a passage which plainly shows the Supper was observed each and every Sunday.“And upon the first day of the week, preached when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them.” In a frantic effort to nullify the force of this text, members of the J.W. religion have said that Acts 20:7 refers to a common meal rather than the Lord’s Supper. No, Paul ate something to refresh himself at the start of a journey in verse 11, but verse 7 clear1y refers to the regular assemblies of the whole church for worship.

The New Testament repeatedly distinguishes the Lord’s Supper conducted by the church from common meals provided by individuals:

The Lord’s Supper

1. The breaking of the bread is in the context of worship (Acts 2:42).

2. All disciples assembled to eat the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7).

3. When “ye come together in the church,” eat the Lord’s supper rather than a common meal (1 Cor. 11:17&#8209;34).

A Common Meal

1. Eating food from house to house is separate from worship assembles (Acts 2:46b).

2. Paul alone ate food to prepare for a journey – no one else was said to eat (Acts 20:11).

3.“If any man hunger, let him eat at home, that ye come not together unto condemnation”(1 Cor. 11:34).

We should never confuse the duty of the church to provide the Lord’s Supper with the duty of individuals to provide social meals separate from the work of the church.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 min Buck Crick 841,080
Tamil vs Kannada. Which one is the oldest langu... (Oct '12) 5 min The swamiji 1,461
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 25 min Ruby88 53,357
Why do we live life when we have to die anyway? (Jul '13) 33 min wiseman34 192
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 43 min Tony17 100,176
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr 2all 591,232
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 1 hr Truths 4,718
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Truths 612,247
More from around the web