Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 653686 comments on the CBC News story from Jul 10, 2007, titled Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican. In it, CBC News reports that:

The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBC News.

Pad

Rockford, IL

#463589 Jul 19, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~
QUOTING
ANOTHER LIE...
FROM YOUR CATECHISM FABLES AGAIN ABOUT YOUR INVENTED, FANTASY LAND...
RIGHT?
THE BIBLE SAYS
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Purgatory is somewhat alluded to in Maccabees,I wonder why it is never even alluded to or taught about in the New Testament.Surely Jesus would have warned His apostles and other disciples about that place,they most likely would have to go to before Heaven,to be purged of the dross we all acquire just living in this earth.

If the Catholics here would take the time to show us the reality of Purgatory in the New Testament,every where it brings it up,we of course would have no choice but to believe it does exist.UNTIL than we know that"It is appointed unto every man ONCE to die and than the Judgment."

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 53:1.--6 "MATT 10:27"

#463590 Jul 19, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
So Babylon is Rome in Revelation, but it's not Rome in 1 Peter. And Ananias wasn't supposed to tell St. Paul that baptism would wash away his sins. lol.
Yes, Sts. Peter and Paul were in Rome. All respected biblical scholars INCLUDING protestant say St. Peter was there and died a martyr. They built up the Church in Rome and appointed and ordained successors. St. Paul says the faith of the Church at Rome is reknowned throughout the whole world.
Neither of them say one word about two goofy self-appointed, self annointed loudmouthed fundamentalist preachers in AD 2013. Sorry.
~~~

You wrote...

Neither of them say one word about two goofy self-appointed, self annointed loudmouthed fundamentalist preachers in AD 2013. Sorry.

THE BIBLES SAYS

Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent?

~~~
THE APOSTLE PAUL ADMONISHED TIMOTHY

1Ti_1:18 This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare;

THE SAME CHARGE THAT WAS GIVEN TO TIMOTHY

by the Apostle Paul still stands today...

tho your Catholics ignore it... defy it...deny it...AND REJECT IT

IT READS...

2Ti 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

--->THIS SPEAKS ABOUT YOU AND YOUR CONJECTURE<---

2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

2Ti 4:5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.

---
THE LIFESTYLE OF A PREACHER SHOULD BE

1Th 5:14 Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men.

1Th 5:15 See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.

1Th 5:16 Rejoice evermore.

1Th 5:17 Pray without ceasing.

1Th 5:18 In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.

1Th 5:19 Quench not the Spirit.

1Th 5:20 Despise not prophesyings.

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

1Th 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

1Th 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1Th 5:24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

1Th 5:25 Brethren, pray for us.

1Th 5:26 Greet all the brethren with an holy kiss.

NOTE

1Th 5:27 I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.

1Th 5:28 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

I DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE ANY ONE'S PERMISSION TO FULFILL THE CALLING THAT GOD HAS PLACED UPON ME TO PREACH HIS WORD...

2Pe 1:10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

2Pe 1:11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

2Pe 1:12 Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#463591 Jul 19, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey herme
Thought I was the only one up..
How is sera
Sorry RoSesz, I didnt see your post til the next morning. I posted my post and left.I hope you are well. See ta here soon.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#463592 Jul 19, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
You may have stated "he's infallible under the proper definition", but you are yet to admit it is your belief.
Please stop stalling and answer the question, well that is if you are honest enough to do so. Which appears you aren't.
Well?
Of course I believe it you jackass, I wouldn't have said "he is" unless I believed it.

Now how 'bout you?

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#463593 Jul 19, 2013
Pad wrote:
<quoted text>Christian teachers and so on have been very clear JUNE,in stating "ALL have sinned and come SHORT of the glory of God."
Just as I don't believe Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, or any other teachers of religion, I don't believe Christian teachers of religion.

It's ALL self-ingratiating bunk!

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#463594 Jul 19, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~
THE BIBLE SAYS
Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed.(Leviticus 20:9)

If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die.(Leviticus 20:10).

If a man sleeps with his father's wife... both him and his father's wife is to be put to death.(Leviticus 20:11)

If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death.(Leviticus 20:14)

If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed.(Leviticus 20:15-16).

If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their people" (Leviticus 20:18)

Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death.(Leviticus 20:27)

If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake.(Leviticus 21:9)

People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)

Anyone who curses or blasphemes God, should be stoned to death by the community.(Leviticus 24:14-16)

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#463595 Jul 19, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true. I never said or implied two Greek bishops covered the same territory. I specifically stated "different traditions" decribing them as "Serb, Russian, Ukrainian, Greek", etc.
You may have misundertood me, but you denied it initially, then reconsidered after realizing you were wrong.
As far as changing our mass, the essential parts of the mass have never been changed. See St. Justin Martyr (circa AD 150) for reference.
Metropolitan Phillip says this of modern Orthodoxy:
"Eastern Orthodoxy is plagued by excessive nationalism, liturgical decay, and doctrinal fluctuations - all factors which have crippled its apostolic energies."
yeah, ok. I know by now whatever is presented the Caths here will either refuse to acknowledge they are wrong or just lie. Go with your bros and leave me alone.I am wasting time with your group. The Protestants are absolutely correct. You dont know the truth and dont want to know the truth. You are the best. Go team.
I waste my time, thinking you are somehow sincere, and this is how you respond. Wont happen again, chum.
Pad

Rockford, IL

#463596 Jul 19, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll tell you once again and hopefully it'll sink in this time:
I know of no Catholic that believes in the power of the Eucharist because they read about it or some Priest told them about it...
We partake in it. We go to the front of the Church and receive it. We eat it and it dwells in us.
Christ installed this brilliant gift so that we would know truth.
The two men on the road to Emmaus didn't recognize Jesus nor the scriptures until Christ gave them the Eucharist.
Luke 24: 13-32
No until He broke bread and PRAYED! You say it was the Eucharist,He did not tell them eat this is my body.or drink this is my blood after his walk with them down the road of Emmaus. He sat with them broke bread and prayed.That is when they knew who He was.You are making it sound like the bread they ate opened their eyes because that bread was the Eucharist or literally Christ Himself. Stretching it a bit to suit your own beliefs Clay?
Dust Storm

Minneapolis, MN

#463597 Jul 19, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true. I never said or implied two Greek bishops covered the same territory. I specifically stated "different traditions" decribing them as "Serb, Russian, Ukrainian, Greek", etc.
You may have misundertood me, but you denied it initially, then reconsidered after realizing you were wrong.
As far as changing our mass, the essential parts of the mass have never been changed. See St. Justin Martyr (circa AD 150) for reference.
Metropolitan Phillip says this of modern Orthodoxy:
"Eastern Orthodoxy is plagued by excessive nationalism, liturgical decay, and doctrinal fluctuations - all factors which have crippled its apostolic energies."
Anthony actually that was another Orthodox Fr Cleenewwerk in his book who said that. It is no secret that the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Russia have a serious problem. Metropolitan Hilarion who was to attend the Joint commission at Ravenna did not participate because I believe its Estonia was present. I would have to look it up again. Regardless Bartholemew gave them autocephoulous nature. Russia does not recognize this nor do they accept that Bartholemew had the righ to do it. Both of them are accusing the other of ceasar popism. A serious insult I guess. Likoudis talked briefly about the interpretation of Canon 28 as being interpret by Metropolitan Philip. Ultimately it is because of the different interpretations of Canons applied today that it creates division and there is no authority to look to as everyone is equal. The church should not be divided along ethnic lines. Likoudis goes briefly into Canon 28 and Philips interpretation. It should be noted which is not in the article that Canon 28 was proposed by about 60 Bishops of the 650 present. Its a matter of record it was not approved by the Pope and it was hinging upon his approval. The language is very clear that Pope Leo was recognized as the head of the church. So was the proclamation to Hormisda in AD 519 where 2500 Eastern Bishops signed it and again signed by those who opposed Photius.

I didnt do any of things Herme twisted and setting up a strawman to call me a liar, there is no reasoning with that guy. I clearly posted the link to read. It is an article by James Likoudis who yes has high credentials and is a Historian. He merely quoted what Phillip said and then points to why its of interest to Catholics. Divisions among the Orthodox is a big problem because talks cant begin if they are fighting with one another on who is in charge and who has authority to do what.

From the article: However maybe Fr. Cleenewerck wore a cowboy suit and isnt really Orthodox. I guess Herme has to check with his sources unknown to us. Regardless Herme has a propensity to twist everything.

There remains the fact, however, that in the words of a recent OCA theologian Fr. Laurent A. Cleenewerck (cf. his recent volume "His Broken Body"):

"Eastern Orthodoxy is plagued by excessive nationalism, liturgical decay, and doctrinal fluctuations - all factors which have crippled its apostolic energies."
For his part, Fr. Cleenewerck goes far in his admission of the need to have a universal Primate in the Church since:

"the universal vocation of the Church is connected to a universal primacy that should neither be absolute nor empty... History shows that the Churches need some kind of international center or mechanism of unity and arbitration."

Fr. Cleenewerck frankly admitted:
"Orthodox would almost like to forget that their [liturgical] calendar and theology is replete with ‘Popes of Rome’ whose teachings about their own authority is better left unmentioned."

http://credo.stormloader.com/Ecumenic/philioc...
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#463598 Jul 19, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
in·fal·li·ble/&#618;n& #712;fæl&#601;b&#601;l /[in-fal-uh-buhl]
adjective
1. absolutely trustworthy or sure: an infallible rule.
2. unfailing in effectiveness or operation; certain: an infallible remedy.
3. not fallible; exempt from liability to error, as persons, their judgment, or pronouncements: an infallible principle.
4. Roman Catholic Church . immune from fallacy or liability to error in expounding matters of faith or morals by virtue of the promise made by Christ to the Church.
Maybe you don't understand the definition.
We all already know that many Popes in the history fo the RCC have not met these qualifications.
Hey NASaL, it's the Church that says he's infallible, so the Church is the one who defines infallibility. The #4 definition is pretty close.

No "we" don't know because a pope doesn't have any "qualifications" to meet other than what is described in the definition.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#463599 Jul 19, 2013
These Christians refuse to see that if they were born into any other religion, chances are they would stay in that religion until they died.

Instead of acknowledging that is true and opening their minds to a broader ways of perceiving, they keep on preaching as though they know that a god believes they are special simply because they are Christian.

What a shame that humans are so blatantly selfish.
Clay

Garden City, MI

#463600 Jul 19, 2013
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>and just what might that me, mr Clay?
the Words that Jesus gave Orally, I abide by, but do you?
and they are written down for us to abide by.
In a nut shell, the Word of God given orally is the Apostles explaining their writings. Even though it was communicated before they actually wrote anything and some Apostles preached without the copies of each others writings.
You think you need to go to a Bible study class to figure out what Jesus was talking about and what Paul was teaching. And some of you foolishly believe all you need to do is ask the Holy Spirit to bring you to Biblical truth. Then, when 5 of you got 5 different interpretations, you still act as though the Spirit guided you. Weird.

Really, all you need to do is figure out what the Disciples taught... and the Disciples of the Disciples taught. You don't think God can protect His word through oral communication? You think Christ commanded that His followers compile a Bible for the distribution of His word?
Show me from scripture where Christ commands this?

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#463601 Jul 19, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who=" Anthony MN"
They were sinners. We are all sinners. There were a few scoundrels in St. Peter's chair, but the gates of hell did not prevail. Even the worst did not teach error.
**********
Anthony...the rest of us, and the Bible, make it plain that one's actions teach more than their words.
If one 'teaches' the Word, but lives in opposition to it, what do you think his hearers believe? Do?
Honest people call that HYPOCRISY...
KayMarie
Does this post imply that you will notbe claiming what "God" knows and what "He" doesn't?

We'll see.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#463602 Jul 19, 2013
"I WANT and therefore DEMAND to believe that GOD only gave Christians in MY denomination the truth.

I WILL have MY way, and let no man put MY way with words asunder!!!"

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#463603 Jul 19, 2013
Concerning words theologians were busy "operators."
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>

Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable by Ivor H. Evans … First published 1817.

Bible, the English. The Principal versions in chronological order are;

Wyclif’s Bible.
Tyndate’s Bible.
Coverdale’s Bible.
Mathew’s Bible.
Taverner’s Bible.
The Great Bible.
Cromwell’s Bible.
Cranmer’s Bible.
The Geneva Bible.
The Bishop’s Bible.
Matthew Parker’s Bible.
The Douai Bible.
King James Bible The AUTHORIZED VERSION.
The Revised Version.
The American Standard Version.
The New Testament in Modern Speech.
Moffat’s Translation.
Knox Version.
The Revised Standard Version.
The New Testament in Modern English.
The New English Bible.
The Jerusalem Bible.
The Revised Standard Version Common Bible.
The Good News Bible: Today’s English Version.
The New International Version.
The Adulterous Bible.
The Bad Bible.
The Bear Bible.
Bedell’s Bible.
The Breeches Bible.
The Brother’s Bible.
The Bug Bible.
Camel’s Bible.
Computensian Polygot.
The Denial Bible.
The Discharge Bible.
The Ears to Ear Bible.
The Ferrara Bible.
The Forgotten Sins Bible.
The Forty-two-line Bible.
The Goose Bible.
The Gutenberg Bible.
The He Bible.
The Idle Bible.
The Incunabula Bible.
The Indian Bible.
Judas Bible.
The Kralitz Bible.
The Large Family Bible.
The Leda Bible.
The Leopolita Bible.
The Lions Bible.
More Sea Bible.
The Old Cracow Bible.
The Ostrog Bible
Pfister’s Bible.
The Printer’s Bible.
The Proof Bible (Probe-Bibel).
The Rosin Bible.
Sacy’s Bible
Schelhorn’s Bible.
The September Bible.
The She Bible
“Sin-on” Bible.
The Standing Fishes Bible.
The Sting Bible.
The Thirty-six-line Bible.
The To-remain Bible
The Treacle Bible
The Unrighteous Bible.
The Vinegar Bible.
The Whig Bible.
The Wicked Bible.
The Wife-hater Bible.
Wujek’s Bible.
The Zurich Bible.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#463604 Jul 19, 2013
And they overlooked the "Jefferson bible," and who knows how many other bibles they overlooked?

A woman I knew (now deceased) re-wrote her version of the bible especially for "easy-reading" by street people.

Word-meddlers ... one and all!

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#463605 Jul 19, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
As far as changing our mass, the essential parts of the mass have never been changed. See St. Justin Martyr (circa AD 150) for reference.
Right. I guess none of this never happened. Believe what you want. I waste my time putting in work for your group.I posted this before. You ignored it then. ignore it again.

Orthodox Liturgy is closest to the Liturgy the Early Church.
While the Catholic Church has had many revisions which have continued through the modern age.

1. REIGN OF CONSTANTINE Secular influences on liturgy starting in the reign of CONSTANTINE in the early part of the 4TH CENTURY, Research into Roman imperial court ceremonial reveals inescapable parallels in Church liturgy. Once the Church had joined in partnership with the state, it was necessary to integrate the bishops etc into the Imperial status system Bishops and other clerics began to enjoy the privileges and ceremonies of the imperial court and of high ranking officials..

Thus, the Pope was accorded some of the ceremonial privileges of the Emperor himself, such as having people kissing his foot. The bishops became entitled to wear the dress and insignia of the highest ranking Romans..
2 The Roman Liturgy changed from what we see in Justin Martyr to that of Gregory The change is radical, especially as regards the most important element of the Mass, the Canon.
3. BY AROUND 1000 AD, THE LITURGY OF ROME WAS A MIXTURE OF THE GREGORIAN LITURGY AND TWO VERSIONS FROM BEYOND THE ALPS, THE GELASIAN (ORIGINALLY FROM ROME) AND THE ANCIENT GALLICAN.
4.During the c10th the Papacy went through a bad period and the liturgical life of the city came close to extinction, saved only by devoted efforts in some of the Cluniac monasteries newly founded there.

5 WHEN A LITURGICAL REVIVAL TOOK PLACE AT THE END OF THE CENTURY, IT SHOWED DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE FRANCO-GERMAN IN ORIGIN. This Franco-German influence is explicable in terms of partly of the Cluniac presence, but mainly of the efforts of the Saxons, Otto I (912-973) and Otto II (955-983),‘religious men’[p 76], who tried to reform the Papacy during their interventions in Italy and supplied liturgical books from beyond the Alps.

[6]BUT IN THE LONG AND GRADUAL SUPPLANTING OF THE GALLICAN RITE THE ROMAN WAS ITSELF AFFECTED BY ITS RIVAL, SO THAT WHEN AT LAST IT EMERGES AS SOLE POSSESSOR IT IS NO LONGER THE OLD PURE ROMAN RITE, BUT HAS BECOME THE GALLICANIZED ROMAN USE THAT WE NOW FOLLOW

7 PRE-TRIDENTINE MASS The term Pre-Tridentine Mass here refers to the variants of the liturgical rite of Mass in Rome before 1570, when, with his bull Quo primum, Pope Pius V made the Roman Missal, as revised[1] by him, obligatory throughout the Latin-Rite or Western Church, except for those places and congregations whose distinct rites could demonstrate an antiquity of 200 years or more.

8 TRIDENTINE COUNCIL OF TRENT (1545 1563 1570, WHEN, WITH HIS BULL QUO PRIMUM, POPE PIUS V MADE THE ROMAN MISSAL, AS REVISED[1] BY HIM, OBLIGATORY THROUGHOUT THE LATIN-RITE OR WESTERN CHURCH, EXCEPT FOR THOSE PLACES AND CONGREGATIONS WHOSE DISTINCT RITES COULD DEMONSTRATE AN ANTIQUITY OF 200 YEARS OR MORE.

9 IN THE FACE ON THE ONE HAND OF THE ATTACK ON THE MASS BY THE PROTESTANTS, LUTHER (1483-1546) AND ZWINGLI (1484-1531), AND ON THE OTHER HAND OF THE ‘CHAOTIC STATE OF LITURGICAL PRACTICE’[P 117], THE COUNCIL OF TRENT (1545-1563) DETERMINED ON REFORM OF THE MISSAL AND THE BREVIARY

( SEE 10 AND 11 NEXT POST )

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#463606 Jul 19, 2013
10 The Latin Tridentine Mass remained the standard eucharistic liturgy in the Roman Catholic Church in the West until the Second Vatican Council. In 1963, the Council adopted, by an overwhelming majority, the Constitution On Sacred Liturgy "Sacrosantum Concilium Following Vatican II, Pope Paul VI instituted a new form of the Mass : THE “NEW MASS”,

11 MASS CATHOLIC 2011 UNDERGOING FIRST CHANGES IN 40 YEARS New translation will go into effect in Sep 17, 2011 In the Orthodox Church 1. Most changes have involved keeping the original hymns, prayers, antiphons, processions, and liturgical components but merely shifting their order 2. Justinian 525 added "Only begotten Son and Word of God..." JUSTINIANS HYMN
Clay

Garden City, MI

#463607 Jul 19, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~
QUOTING
ANOTHER LIE...
FROM YOUR CATECHISM FABLES AGAIN ABOUT YOUR INVENTED, FANTASY LAND...
RIGHT?
THE BIBLE SAYS
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Don't get me wrong Confrinting 'with some of the Word', I think its cute that you believe you're an authority on Sacred Scripture. I'm sure you mean well and you're a nice man in person. But you were not called to preach that the Eucharist is not really the body of Christ; that Peter wasn't the first leader; that Mary was just an average woman who happened to say yes. These are teachings that were handed down and protected by God. Its the word of God. You're not a valid Preacher of sacred scripture.

My youngest son used to dress up as a Ninja and fight crime in the back yard. To him, he believed it was more than a fantasy. You think you were called to tell everyone what the Bible says. You were not. We've already received the meaning of those written documents we call sacred scripture.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#463608 Jul 19, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>

As far as changing our mass, the essential parts of the mass have never been changed. See St. Justin Martyr (circa AD 150) for reference.
==========

10 The Latin Tridentine Mass remained the standard eucharistic liturgy in the Roman Catholic Church in the West until the Second Vatican Council. In 1963, the Council adopted, by an overwhelming majority, the Constitution On Sacred Liturgy "Sacrosantum Concilium Following Vatican II, Pope Paul VI instituted a new form of the Mass : THE “NEW MASS”,

11 MASS CATHOLIC 2011 UNDERGOING FIRST CHANGES IN 40 YEARS New translation will go into effect in Sep 17, 2011 In the Orthodox Church 1. Most changes have involved keeping the original hymns, prayers, antiphons, processions, and liturgical components but merely shifting their order 2. Justinian 525 added "Only begotten Son and Word of God..." JUSTINIANS HYMN

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
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min here 63,430
Fedz Pimping Poison Meat - Don't Buy 35 min HiddnNumbrz 1
You are of your father......THE DEVIL. 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 20
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 106,478
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 1 hr WasteWater 2,568
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr Gabriel 973,680
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 1 hr Classic 3,797
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 4 hr LAWEST100 618,751
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 hr Pegasus 281,841
More from around the web