Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 574,092
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story
marge

Ames, IA

#405134 Nov 26, 2012
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry KayMarie but baptism is a COMMAND.....with many more COMMANDS from Jesus in the New Testament....
And, I am NOT speaking of the 10 Commandments.....
You have to be Saved first, only then can one follow the Law of Christ.
guest

United States

#405135 Nov 26, 2012
Fr Robert Dye wrote:
Uhmmmm ...
.
.
While it is true that we as Catholics practice infant baptism, I seriously doubt it it truly ne essary for anyone who has not attained the age of reason.
.
Rob
-
-
4GVN wrote:
<quoted text>Agreed.
-
Robert Dye, you as Catholics do a lot of things that are not necessary, not only for those who have yet to reach the age of reason, but also for those who HAVE reached the age of reason, and yet refuse to *reason* in deference to the Church hierarchy.
-
You go against the words of Christ, to follow the words of the pope.
-
Christ himself said, "Call no man your father." (Matthew 23:9)
Pope said, "No THAT'S not right, call me AND your local parish priest father."
-
Christ himself said, "You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." (Mark 7:8)
Pope and church leaders said, "forget what Jesus said, Church tradition has equal importance to the Bible."
-
-
These are only two glaring examples of how the church has implied that they know more than Christ himself.

there are more examples, but I am feeling too sick tonight to type much more

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 55:11--"MATT 10:27"

#405136 Nov 26, 2012
who="Michael"
KayMarie says......
"A day with the Lord is as a thousand years." No man lived a full thousand years. Methuselah came closest at 969 years.
Michael said, so what is wrong with living over 1,000 years and spending a day with the Lord as you claim? Few people back in the day could not even count to 10.
KayMarie says.....
Then the allotted time was reduced to 125 years, and finally to 70 years, where it remains and it can be shortened or lengthened.
Michael says......You make this stuff up on the fly. Its sillyness.
What source of information tells you this?
makes no common sense. Its laughable!

**********

The Bible is not based on (human) common sense (logic). It is based on Truth...the knowledge of God, which is greater than 'logic'.

It is hard to kick against the prick...

KayMarie

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 55:11--"MATT 10:27"

#405137 Nov 26, 2012
who="guest"

Robert Dye, you as Catholics do a lot of things that are not necessary, not only for those who have yet to reach the age of reason, but also for those who HAVE reached the age of reason, and yet refuse to *reason* in deference to the Church hierarchy.
-
You go against the words of Christ, to follow the words of the pope.
-
Christ himself said, "Call no man your father." (Matthew 23:9)
Pope said, "No THAT'S not right, call me AND your local parish priest father."
-
Christ himself said, "You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." (Mark 7:8)
Pope and church leaders said, "forget what Jesus said, Church tradition has equal importance to the Bible."
-
-
These are only two glaring examples of how the church has implied that they know more than Christ himself.
there are more examples, but I am feeling too sick tonight to type much more

**********

Be healed...

KM
Dust Storm

Minneapolis, MN

#405139 Nov 26, 2012
4GVN wrote:
<quoted text>Agreed.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/early-teaching...

St. Irenaeus was the disciple of St. Polycarp, who was the disciple of the Apostle John himself (as well as an associate of the Apostle Philip). And, in AD 155, St. Polycarp said this at his execution:

"Polycarp declared,'Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me injury. How can I blaspheme my King and Savior?" (Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp 9 c. AD 156)

Now, it is well documented that "The Martyrdom of Polycarp" was written the year after the saint's execution; and so the quote above is extremely reliable. It is also well documented that Polycarp was 86 years old at the time of his death. Therefore, if the saint claims to have served Jesus for 86 years, it therefore follows that he was Baptized as an infant. And, in another place, we are told that Polycarp was Baptized by none other than the Apostle John!:-) Therefore, at least in the case of St. John, we can show conclusively that the Apostles Baptized infants.

http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a26.htm

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/baptism.html
truth

Perth, Australia

#405140 Nov 26, 2012
http://www.google.com.au/search...

creation determination recreation..
Are you for sure you destroy everything?

i am not sure they destroy ..in small segment of rock any small tiny life..
perhaps within is ''formula=code''..yes for what?
creation..which they think they destroy..
no
7th Day Catholics Rock

Poplar Bluff, MO

#405141 Nov 26, 2012
Dust Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
4GVN wrote:
Fr Robert Dye wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhmmmm ...
Which strikes me as absurd. I'll grant, I don't know of any god to compare God to, but it seems to me that, if God is truly Good, He would not condemn unbaptised infants.
.
Jesus DID say it was necessary, but He also seems to make exceptions, such as the Good Thief.
Rob
.
Rob
Rob, have you truely considered the possibility that Jesus 'does not make exceptions' but perhaps there is a flaw in the understanding of what the 'GOSPEL' truely is and what part if any, baptism has in ones salvation. And perhaps there is a misunderstanding of what 'born of water' truely means. Is it possible that it is not in referance to water baptism at all?
.
I don't think there is any question that the Christ commanded water baptism as a condition of salvation, and all who are capable of hearing that and understanding it are bound by it.
.Does this mean that Jesus Himself is bound by it? I don't see why He would be.
.
Jesus is the One in Charge. If He chooses to make exceotions to His own rule, who are we to question that.
.We know the rule, and should be following it.
.
Infants cannot know the rule, and I seriously doubt that God would hold them to it.(Might He hold their parents to it? it's possible ...)
.
We do what we can. With infants, if we are going to err, we will err on the side of caution, and baptize.
.I cannot find your earlier post, so I will try to address it as best I can from memory.
.
It is my belief that baptism of infants confers grace. Does this involve the HS? Yes, of course. All graces involve all the Persons of the Trinity.
.
Is the grace received at baptism of an infant (or an adult, really) the same as being "born from above?"
.
Well, we need to be careful not to be twisted up by semantics.
.
ALL grace comes "from above." so, is a person born again from water (baptism) "born from above?"
.
Well ... in a manner of speaking... yessssss ...
.
But Jesus spoke of this as two different things, so let us treat them as two different thing.
.Jesus said we must be reborn of water and the Spirit.
.
Okay. The water part is easy. It is the "death of baptism," the symbolic drowning, and coming back up out of the water ... this is "born again of water.
.
Born of the Spirit seems to imply some new relationship to the Spirit. If we treat it as analogous to baptism (and Jesus DID speak of both in the same breath, so linking them this way is not without justification), then it would be a "death to our old life, and a rising to a new life." A "death" to the life of sin, and a "rising" to a new life of virtue.
.
In other words, just getting baptized won't do it, at least not for anyone capable of doing more.
.
Luke 3:
"7 Then said [John the Baptist] to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham."
They are called not just to the eternal sign (baptism), but to live an INTERNAL one as well, repentance.
.
Do infants receive grace from the HS at baptism? Of course.
.
Are they capable of living repentance?
.
No, not at all.
.
When they DO become capable of repentance, and they do repent, do they enter into a new and DEEPER relationship with the Holy Spirit?
.
I woukd insist that they do, and that it wad this that Jesus refers to.
.
Rob
Good Thief ?.........LOL
4GVN

Wentzville, MO

#405142 Nov 26, 2012
Dust Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/early-teaching...
St. Irenaeus was the disciple of St. Polycarp, who was the disciple of the Apostle John himself (as well as an associate of the Apostle Philip). And, in AD 155, St. Polycarp said this at his execution:
"Polycarp declared,'Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me injury. How can I blaspheme my King and Savior?" (Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp 9 c. AD 156)
Now, it is well documented that "The Martyrdom of Polycarp" was written the year after the saint's execution; and so the quote above is extremely reliable. It is also well documented that Polycarp was 86 years old at the time of his death. Therefore, if the saint claims to have served Jesus for 86 years, it therefore follows that he was Baptized as an infant. And, in another place, we are told that Polycarp was Baptized by none other than the Apostle John!:-) Therefore, at least in the case of St. John, we can show conclusively that the Apostles Baptized infants.
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a26.htm
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/baptism.html
Boy, that is a typical bit of Catholic engineering.lol So Polycarp began serving the Lord when he was one year old??? In what capacity did he serve him??? As a one year old priest? This is just ridicules.
Dust Storm

Minneapolis, MN

#405143 Nov 26, 2012
4GVN wrote:
<quoted text>Boy, that is a typical bit of Catholic engineering.lol So Polycarp began serving the Lord when he was one year old??? In what capacity did he serve him??? As a one year old priest? This is just ridicules.
A Jew becomes a servant of God and entered into the covenant on circumcision by the faith of his parents so does the baptized person. The 8th day has a significants but you can look it up.

That you consider Polycarp's words chosen by St John to be ridiculous is no surprise as it doesnt fit the way you want to mold things to your personal view. Whats new? Just as you want to twist my words or Fr. Robs into what you want it to mean not what was said.

I wont speak for Fr. Rob and put words in his mouth as you do and would sincerely appreciate it if you would stop it with me as well.

It is simple. The parents accept in faith the gift of Christ and it is up to the Child when they become adults to nurture or reject. The Jewish tradition says that the women kept the children from being circumcized against the will of the Lord. Why? Because some thought it cruel including Moses wife. God was not happy about it and I posted the scripture for the punishment in Joshua for doing so. I know you could not fathom the correlation. Nor could you connect that the faith of believer with unbeliever.

You can play bible dueling verses all day long and get nowhere. Jesus cried out how he longed to have them under one roof not constantly quibbling. You however condemn 2/3 of CHristianity which practices infant baptism. You do realize of course that is alot of ridiculous protestants. lol THe church is the culmination of the Jewish faith.

Here is a Jewish perspective on circumcision which would follow the same rationale.

http://www.circumcision.net/bris_overview.htm
4GVN

Wentzville, MO

#405144 Nov 26, 2012
Dust Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
A Jew becomes a servant of God and entered into the covenant on circumcision by the faith of his parents so does the baptized person. The 8th day has a significants but you can look it up.
That you consider Polycarp's words chosen by St John to be ridiculous is no surprise as it doesnt fit the way you want to mold things to your personal view. Whats new? Just as you want to twist my words or Fr. Robs into what you want it to mean not what was said.
I wont speak for Fr. Rob and put words in his mouth as you do and would sincerely appreciate it if you would stop it with me as well.
It is simple. The parents accept in faith the gift of Christ and it is up to the Child when they become adults to nurture or reject. The Jewish tradition says that the women kept the children from being circumcized against the will of the Lord. Why? Because some thought it cruel including Moses wife. God was not happy about it and I posted the scripture for the punishment in Joshua for doing so. I know you could not fathom the correlation. Nor could you connect that the faith of believer with unbeliever.
You can play bible dueling verses all day long and get nowhere. Jesus cried out how he longed to have them under one roof not constantly quibbling. You however condemn 2/3 of CHristianity which practices infant baptism. You do realize of course that is alot of ridiculous protestants. lol THe church is the culmination of the Jewish faith.
Here is a Jewish perspective on circumcision which would follow the same rationale.
http://www.circumcision.net/bris_overview.htm
I would sincerely appreciate it if you would quit making unfounded incindiary comments about me. As you well know, I put no 'words in Rob's mouth. I simply posted HIS WORDS. And you really don't like that do you?
As you SHOULD know, circumcision was a SIGN of the covenent God had with the Jewish people. It is not the same as the sign of baptism which is a testimony of the 'new birth' in Christ. A Jew did not become a 'servent of God because his parents baptized him, and of course many circumcized Jews led ungodly lives. You are straining a knat. And doing bible contortions to try to find evidence for you practices. But they are exercises in futility. There is NO evidence that John baptized Polycarp or any other person as an infant. And to quote ROB, it is not necessary. As for being 'under one roof' unity in truth would be a great thing. But unity at the expense of truth is too great a cost.
Dust Storm

Minneapolis, MN

#405145 Nov 26, 2012
Case in point, in Matthew 17:14-18, we are told how Jesus cast out a demon from a young boy because of an appeal by the boy's father:

"When they came to the crowd, a man approached, knelt down before Him, and said,'Lord, have pity on my son for he is a lunatic and suffers severly...."

And Jesus heals the boy because of the father's faith. Now, obviously, it was not possible for this boy to have faith in Jesus on his own. He was psychologically and spiritually disturbed (whether naturally or supernaturally); yet Jesus used the father's faith to make him whole again. So, if such a thing is possible with demonic possession, why should Baptism be any different?

Many retarded and/or insane people do not have the ability to reason so as to "accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior" (as the Evangelicals say ;-) Yet, didn't Jesus come to save them as well? Don't they need to be Baptized into Christ?(Rom 6:3; Gal 3:27)

Well, if so, then why should we assume that the ability to reason is necessary for Baptism? Why can't babies be Baptized before they reach the age of reason?

Well, an Evangelical might tell you that it's because the ability to reason is necessary before one can sin. And, indeed, that is very true. We Catholics have an old expression:

"If there's no knowledge, then there's no responsibility. If there's no responsibility, then there's no sin."

So, our Evangelical brothers and sisters try to apply this to Baptism. In the case of an infant or a retarded person, they will say that these lack the ability to reason, and therefore they are free of guilt. And, again, that is very true. However, think about what it implies.:-) What this implies is that infants and retarded people do not need a Savior! Which, to us Catholics, is completely ridiculous.:-)

We know from Scripture itself that Christ came to save everybody, including infants and retarded people. He is their Savior just as much as He is the Savior of rational, healthy adults.

http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a26.htm
Dust Storm

Minneapolis, MN

#405146 Nov 26, 2012
4GVN wrote:
<quoted text>I would sincerely appreciate it if you would quit making unfounded incindiary comments about me. As you well know, I put no 'words in Rob's mouth. I simply posted HIS WORDS. And you really don't like that do you?
As you SHOULD know, circumcision was a SIGN of the covenent God had with the Jewish people. It is not the same as the sign of baptism which is a testimony of the 'new birth' in Christ. A Jew did not become a 'servent of God because his parents baptized him, and of course many circumcized Jews led ungodly lives. You are straining a knat. And doing bible contortions to try to find evidence for you practices. But they are exercises in futility. There is NO evidence that John baptized Polycarp or any other person as an infant. And to quote ROB, it is not necessary. As for being 'under one roof' unity in truth would be a great thing. But unity at the expense of truth is too great a cost.
You forgot alot of his words that dont fit with your view so quit lying and spare me that you have taught anything except how to control massive contempt for someone like you. lol You have no truth thus far. I did not say Jews become servants when they are baptized. Is that another intentional twist or one of your usual half thoughts? Jews do not perform Christian Baptisms. lol And you have a problem with Polycarps words not mine.

As for no evidence I suggest you email Mark Bonocore and challenge him on that. His email is in the link and if you can actually muster up the ability to ask in a charitable fashion which I know is a severe challenge for a great Christian like yourself. Then, I am quite certain he will respond.
4GVN

Wentzville, MO

#405147 Nov 26, 2012
Dust Storm wrote:
Case in point, in Matthew 17:14-18, we are told how Jesus cast out a demon from a young boy because of an appeal by the boy's father:
"When they came to the crowd, a man approached, knelt down before Him, and said,'Lord, have pity on my son for he is a lunatic and suffers severly...."
And Jesus heals the boy because of the father's faith. Now, obviously, it was not possible for this boy to have faith in Jesus on his own. He was psychologically and spiritually disturbed (whether naturally or supernaturally); yet Jesus used the father's faith to make him whole again. So, if such a thing is possible with demonic possession, why should Baptism be any different?
Many retarded and/or insane people do not have the ability to reason so as to "accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior" (as the Evangelicals say ;-) Yet, didn't Jesus come to save them as well? Don't they need to be Baptized into Christ?(Rom 6:3; Gal 3:27)
Well, if so, then why should we assume that the ability to reason is necessary for Baptism? Why can't babies be Baptized before they reach the age of reason?
Well, an Evangelical might tell you that it's because the ability to reason is necessary before one can sin. And, indeed, that is very true. We Catholics have an old expression:
"If there's no knowledge, then there's no responsibility. If there's no responsibility, then there's no sin."
So, our Evangelical brothers and sisters try to apply this to Baptism. In the case of an infant or a retarded person, they will say that these lack the ability to reason, and therefore they are free of guilt. And, again, that is very true. However, think about what it implies.:-) What this implies is that infants and retarded people do not need a Savior! Which, to us Catholics, is completely ridiculous.:-)
We know from Scripture itself that Christ came to save everybody, including infants and retarded people. He is their Savior just as much as He is the Savior of rational, healthy adults.
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a26.htm
You are comparing casting out demons and healing the sick with salvation and that is apples and oranges. You cannot because of bad comparisons and faulty reasoning, change 'God's plann of salvation'. And of course your flawed reasoning in regards to the mentally incapable is in the fact that you link salvation to baptism. That is not what the gospel entails. But then, you really don't know what the gospel is, do you? What is the 'GOOD NEWS" of Jesus Christ. Is it ,'if we get baptized as infants and then reach the age of reason and profess Christ and do ALL o;f the 'good works' required and endureth till the end and keep all of the commandments and go to confession regularly and don't die with any mortal sin unconfessed and go to purgatory for a feww hundred or a few thousand years or more(nobody knows) and if 'good catholics' don't forget to pray me out, then I 'might make it to heaven..??? Well good luck with YOUR gospel. That is really good news.
4GVN

Wentzville, MO

#405148 Nov 27, 2012
Dust Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
You forgot alot of his words that dont fit with your view so quit lying and spare me that you have taught anything except how to control massive contempt for someone like you. lol You have no truth thus far. I did not say Jews become servants when they are baptized. Is that another intentional twist or one of your usual half thoughts? Jews do not perform Christian Baptisms. lol And you have a problem with Polycarps words not mine.
As for no evidence I suggest you email Mark Bonocore and challenge him on that. His email is in the link and if you can actually muster up the ability to ask in a charitable fashion which I know is a severe challenge for a great Christian like yourself. Then, I am quite certain he will respond.
Pardon me, that was a slip on my part. Should have said because his parents had him circumcized did not mean that he became a 'servant of God'. But the fact is that your condecending and incindiary tone does not cover-up your ignorance of scripture. Got a problem with Rob's words, take it up with Rob. You are arrogant and condesending to many people in your posts, which is probably just an attempt to cover up your insecurities. That is the reason that I seldom post to you. But the fact is that the only priest on this thread believes that baptizing infants is probably unnecessary. Personally, I tend to agree with him.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#405149 Nov 27, 2012
Can you imagine, a supreme being, the creator of all, requiring you, the created, to do anything for it?

Can you imagine this supreme being requiring you to preform rituals to please it?

How f'ing stupid are you?

What do you require of your child?

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#405150 Nov 27, 2012
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
O well.... what more can be expect from a real Roman Catholic..
examples such as you speak volumes...
I need not say any thing....You have displayed your own heart, before us all here.
One described in the Old testament
yielding fruit.
Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
Jer 17:10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.
JESUS SAID
Mat_5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Mat_12:34 O generation of vipers,
how can ye, being evil,
speak good things?
for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
27Nov12.....

..Begone you pHillistine...

.....BobLoblah does 'Not' put tooooooooo much stock in da Old Testament.

Ps:.....But da 'New Testament', now dat's someDing different.

BobLoblay believes you to be a hateful, hypocritical, hAtheist....once who while NOT accepting GOD, does so take advantage of utilizing phrases from the Old Testament.....go checkUP....there are 'good' vons tooooooooooo.

BobLoblah also believes dat ven it comes to you, there's more brains in a bottle of wadda.

..and at the mention of the Name of Jesus Christ...every knee should bend.

Forever and Ever
BobLoblah

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#405151 Nov 27, 2012
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
Mr Loblaws......says.
For one to 'blame' the LifeTime of the Holy Roman Catholic Church on a handful of the miserable few.
May I remind you that for every clergy member who sexually buggered a young child were dozens of clergy who knew damn well what was going on and said NOTHING! Reported nothing.
Now times that by the huge number of credable worldwide cases for the past 17 centuries and you will quickly learn "HANDFUL" as you describe isn't even close.
http://www.richardsipe.com/patrick_wall/execu...
Click on DOCUMENTS and CANON LAWS from this webstie and you will quickly learn that the church over 1700 years had attempted (in house only) to try and stem this problem of clergy abuse with little success.
Why would God attach his name to an organization that has had a hidden perverted sub-culture for centuries.
28Nov12.....

.....You just do NOT get it, do you...ya schidt-for-brains.

Yes. There were hundreds, if not thousands of ILK that professed to be priests and 'other' members of the clergy and others outside the clergy in the Holy Roman Catholic Church that sexually abused the youth of their times.

BobLoblah takes NO sides with these monsters and BobLoblah has said it before and will say it again that they should be lined UP and shot.

However, these numbers 'pale' when compared to the 'millions' of good, kind, compassionate, honest, hardWorking Popes, Biships, Cardinals, Priests, Monks, Nuns, Brothers, and other members of the clergy that have come down da pipes over the passt 2000 years.

Ps:....Why don'tCha readUP on those 'outside' the Catholic Church that have sexually abused our youth. Take for example within the BBC where the children's showMan, Jonny Seville has recently been found to have abused over 450 kids. Other ILK associated with him...including the wannabee Rock 'n Roller Gary Glitter.

You should also give some attention to what is going on within the different 'sports organizations'....Penn State comes to mind, and within the hockeyWorld....there are still monsters that roam amongst the young up-'n-commers.

BobLoblah believes dat ven it comes to you 'sickel', there's more brains in a bottle of wadda.

Go figure.

Forever and Ever
BobLoblah

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#405152 Nov 27, 2012
Michael wrote:
Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus on December 25th. However, christians believe that Jesus was not really born on December 25.
Christians celebrate Jesus annunciation on March 25th, 9 months to the exact day of the celebration of Jesus birth on December 25th. So! if christians don't believe December 25th is the actual birth day of Jesus than the annunciation on March 25th can't be right either.
Why claim particular dates of special events if they didn't really occur on those dates?
Makes no common sense.
FESTIVUS is celebrated December 23. We know tht date of celebration to be factual. The actual creator Frank Costanza is still alive and he verifies this date as true.
28Nov12.....

....Some Christians do this.

Ps:...ALL Roman Catholics do NOT.

Go reFigure.

Forever and Ever
BobLoblah

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#405153 Nov 27, 2012
7th Day Catholics Rock wrote:
<quoted text>So is Fred Moore and preston the same person ?
28Nov12.....

....As far as BobLoblah is concerned, all three of you sound da same.

Ps:....and den sum toooooooooooo.

Forever and Ever
BobLoblah
Truth

Leesburg, VA

#405154 Nov 27, 2012
preston wrote:
sorry about that hank, I had copied something and then didnt use it and your name stayed there.
I punished my computer by whipping it with some noodles that I bought at the restaurant today
Not a problem....

About the noodles...make sure they are WET noodles...as my Mom would tell me..."you are going to get 5 lashes with a WET noodle." lol....

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) 2 min Pokay 809,780
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 7 min onemale 268,892
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 25 min Kait the Rotund F... 442,090
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 33 min Qu_innocence 608,207
How to get Free Steam games, Steam Wallet codes... (Dec '13) 38 min alex 92
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 40 min RiccardoFire 39,610
Should we adopt the paleo diet? 40 min diettips 3
Dubai massage Body To Body full service 0559... (Mar '14) 5 hr coco 204
Straight guys: Would you ever have intercourse ... (Jul '12) 15 hr yes lover 162
More from around the web