Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 20 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.

hojo

Chanhassen, MN

#478599 Sep 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~
So you believe What Adam and Eve believed.... that conjecture takes
preeminence over God's word....
You are in for your own rude awakening just as they experienced...
only your separation from God will have no ending...
You deny Him now ...it will be eternal with no redeemer to bail you out.
You have already reject Him...
I'll put my Faith, hope, Salvation and any judgement that Our Lord has for me in HIS HANDS and not in some (anti-catholic) "snake oil" judgmental Protestant preacher like you Confrinting. You do not speak for God and NEVER WILL until you come to TRUE SALVATION in Jesus Christ........ I have heard bible only condemning (hatefilled) ministers like you for over 35 years as a sola scriptura Protestant, until God Our Father, through His Son Jesus, being led by the Holy Spirit, released me from this "bible only BONDAGE" of condemning of other Christians (especially Catholics) and led me to the TRUTH of the TRUE INTERPRETATION of the Bible, along with 2000 years of the TRUTH of TRUE CHURCH HISTORY, manifested (in and through Jesus Christs One True Apostolic Catholic Church.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#478600 Sep 26, 2013
And...

Tell me that this teaches God and Christ are one:
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#478601 Sep 26, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
<quoted text>
He is definitely not the author of the RCC that has at its head leaders that encourage its congregations to sacrifice Jesus on a weekly basis contrary to his very words that declare it is finished he is the last sacrifice and as the the alter was broken and curtain torn we know it is not needed anymore. Yet you contradict his word in your sects your denominations false gospel on weekly basis which is plain to see for those who choose to open their eyes. On that and that alone I can declare the RCC not to be the one true church, because the simple explicit teaching of the Bible contradicts RC teachings out right.
We all agree your sect the RCC is not the one true yadda yadda that apparently has slipped by you unseen or you choose to ignore that fact as well. LOL
What you are too zealous as was Judas to zealous to see is that you belong to one of the 42000 denominations that you condemn.
BTW Baptists, Alliance, Lutherans, Calvary Chapel Mennonite Brethren etc. etc all agree on the essentials all have the same faith same Gospel and can and do worship in unity and love.
Just because one denomination has a focus on over seas missions or likes to worship with a band and another with and organ does not mean we disagree on that which matters and in all other things Paul in the word of God declares there is liberty.
In God's garden his Church there are many flowers of many shades and colors but all get their energy from the Son of God all point to his light.
If you wish to stick with your cookie cutter man made sect so be it.
As for me and my house we will serve the Lord.
I like that about the flowers,

And THey change their own teachings all the TIME...with New dogma..encyclical,..bowing to science on evolution ..That one shocked me ..

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#478602 Sep 26, 2013
The Pope authorized the Roman Catholic Church's International Theological Commission on April 22, 2007 to publish a 41-page document titled: "The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Being Baptized."

Britain's newspaper-website, Telegraph.co.uk , in an article written by Nick Pisa in Rome, reports: "Babies who die before being baptized will no longer be trapped in Limbo following a decision by the Pope to abolish the concept from Roman Catholic teaching. The decision was taken after Pope Benedict XVI was presented with Vatican studies that said there were 'serious' grounds that such souls could go to heaven, rather than exist between heaven and hell as they have done for almost 800 years."

According to the same report, it was in early 1984 when then Cardinal Prefect Joseph Ratzinger of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, announced in The Ratzinger Report that as a private theologian he rejected the claim that children who die unbaptized cannot attain salvation, and that he was also speaking for many academic theologians of similar understanding.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#478603 Sep 26, 2013
continued

Thus by 1992 the Catechism of the Catholic Church expressed the hope that children who die without being baptized might still be saved when it stated: "As regards children who have died without baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God, who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children, which caused him to say,'Let the children come to me, do not hinder them'[Mark 10:14
, cf. 1 Tim 2:4
], allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without baptism."

The doctrine of Limbo was introduced by the eminent Catholic philosopher Augustine (354-430). He concluded that infants who died without baptism were consigned to hell. Consequently, in 385 Pope Siricius wrote to Bishop Himerius that he felt bound in conscience—for the sake of his own salvation—to warn Himerius that he should insist on the baptism of infants as well as adults in his diocese. However, not all parishioners sought Catholic baptism for their children.

More than 800 years later, Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), an Italian Dominican monk, theologian and philosopher came up with Limbo as a state of natural happiness for unbaptized children, as well as for others lacking the use of reason; but taught that a reward of supernatural happiness for them was inappropriate because of their original sin

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#478604 Sep 26, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
<quoted text>
If Oreilly had actually investigated thoroughly history and studied history he would have come to the historical conclusion that Jesus died on the cross and rose again.
It is a Historical Fact.
So many great minds have come to this conclusion this is a historical fact and they cannot deny it.
One example is SIMON GREENLEAF and American the father of Modern day Evidential Law one of Harvard's greatest professors when challenged by his students to test the facts of history in light of evidence became a believer. He came to the conclusion that the evidence was undeniable Jesus Rose from the dead it was a historical fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Greenleaf
Like most Roman Catholics O'rielly is being politically correct he is trying to please men all be it conservative but never the less non believers.
Odd as it seems, you forgot to include how he was "Christian" which makes him nonsecular and bias toward Christianity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Greenleaf

"Simon's father Moses Greenleaf married Lydia Parsons, daughter of Rev. Jonathan Parsons of Newburyport."

"It should be pursued as in the presence of God, and under the solemn sanctions created by a lively sense of his omniscience, and of our accountability to him for the right use of the faculties which he has bestowed."

"In requiring this candor and simplicity of mind in those who would investigate the truth of our religion,"

http://www.bibleteacher.org/sgtestimony.htm

Anyone can come up with one relevant source to uphold their position. One instance does not make it true.

I've listed multiple times on where the resurrection is just a made up story. Yet you don't believe those.

Yes CiB - Self is the answer you should be accepting, as you already utilize it in every aspect of your belief anyhow.

Why do you think certain fallible men were accurate in trying to define an infallible being?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#478605 Sep 26, 2013
and...

Limbo, from Latin limbus meaning edge or boundary (of hell by implication), was thereafter taught to be a state after death in Roman Catholic theology. It was compartmentalized into two categories, one for children called limbus infantium and the second for the Fathers called limbus patrum, a temporary state of the souls of anciently righteous people.

It was in the 14th century that the Italian poet Dante Alighiere (1265-1321) wrote his most popular literary work Divina Commedia (The Divine Comedy). Overlooked by most is the fact that his work intentionally included the word commedia (comedy) because he made fun of (did a parody / satire of) the then popular religious teachings of Limbo, Purgatory, and Paradise, and even assigned known personalities of his day into those various categories!

The decision of the present Pope marks a gradual softening of the Catholic view towards those who die without being baptized. Pope Benedict XVI, prior to his election to the Papacy, was already on record for his personal disbelief in Limbo. Since, from a biblical perspective, the doctrine of purgatory stands in the same category as Limbo, will it be next for review by Catholic religious scholars? For that we will have to wait to see.

But an important lesson should be learned from this significant change in a long embedded religious doctrine. We can see that even in our society's largest and most entrenched religious body professing that its beliefs represent those of Jesus Christ there can be long-held teachings and traditions which (upon in-depth study) turn out to be in error.

Rather than embracing—without proof—religious ideas which you may not have yet personally examined, why not take time to do some in-depth biblical study on your own? We can help by providing you—free and without any obligation—reliably researched and accurately documented reading material on biblical subjects.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#478606 Sep 26, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
And...
Tell me that this teaches God and Christ are one:
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
Where do you think "Paul", a 3rd generation disciple, learned this theology from?

But yet you think "Paul" knew more than Jesus, as Jesus never called himself "God".

Why?

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#478607 Sep 26, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
The ever change doctrines of the Sect known as Roman Catholicism
437
Proclamation that infant baptism regenerates the soul
500
The Mass instituted as a re-sacrifice of Jesus for the remission of sins
593
Declaration that sins need to be purged, established by Pope Gregory I
600
Prayers directed to Mary, dead saints, and angels
786
Worship of cross, images, and relics authorized
995
Canonization of dead people as saints initiated by Pope John XV
1000
Attendance at Mass made mandatory under the penalty of mortal sin
1079
Celibacy of priesthood, decreed by Pope Gregory VII
1090
Rosary, repetitious praying with beads, invented by Peter the Hermit
1184
The Inquisition, instituted by the Council of Verona
1190
The sale of Indulgences established to reduce time in Purgatory
1215
Transubstantiation, proclaimed by Pope Innocent III
1215
Confession of sins to priests, instituted by Pope Innocent III
1229
Bible placed on Index of Forbidden Books in Toulouse
1438
Purgatory elevated from doctrine to dogma by Council of Florence
1545
Tradition claimed equal in authority with the Bible by the Council of Trent
1546
Apocryphal Books declared cannon by Council of Trent
1854
Immaculate Conception of Mary, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX
1870
Infallibility of the Pope, proclaimed by Vatican Council
1922
Virgin Mary proclaimed co-redeemer with Jesus by Pope Benedict XV
yea and they think Evangelical protestants are confused.
LOL


Man may also have evolved from other BIOLOGICAL FORMS,...

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-e...

not my opinion ...this is what they now teach as it has their imprimatur

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#478608 Sep 26, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
<quoted text>
Again I posted what is the definition of Sola Scriptoria and what it is not.
Never once have I or anyone else made the following assertion
"every word, every phrase, every sentence MUST BE IN THE bible in order for it to be TRUE"
Those are your words and yours alone pun intended. In fact the opposite has been stated.
So there is no need for anyone here to defend that which we have never asserted.
Make all the straw men you want it only shows your lack of intelligence and a willingness to debate in honor and honesty, it only shows those seeking truth that your assertions can not be shown to be true with logic, historical evidence and biblical evidence they show your position is without merit and is false.
Truth MATTERS you have not posted any.
PLUS SINCE EACH BOOK WAS,WRITTEN AS,AN ACCOUNT OR A LETTER ..AT THE TIME THEY were written there WAS,NO BOOK CALLED THE BIBLE OR COLLECTION
OF THESE WORKS..

SO no way they could say you must read the bible ..That is,SO OBVIOUS,.

AS,I KEEP SAYING unless some monk in.a basement made up the whole things,

Theses,SCRIPTURES were the words of those who knew and lived Jesus,..the way the CATHOLUCS put us,down for our belief in them I keep wondering

I find it interesting in your list that the bible was,banned AND AFTER THAT TRADITION WAS DECLARED TO BE AS,IMPORTANT AS SCRIPTURE .....

as,in the truth was,out ...among the rabble ..let's,make it seem less important unless THE RCC declares its interpretation..

I never knew,any of this ...
Tango Bravo

Wichita, KS

#478609 Sep 26, 2013
OldJG wrote:
Alligator Scars (Fiction)
Some years ago on a hot summer day in south Florida a little boy decided to go for a swim in the old swimming hole behind his house.
In a hurry to dive into the cool water, he ran out the back door, leaving behind shoes, socks, and shirt as he went. He flew into the water, not realizing that as he swam toward the middle of the lake, an alligator was swimming toward the shore.
His mother - in the house was looking out the window - saw the two as they got closer and closer together. In utter fear, she ran toward the water, yelling to her son as loudly as she could.
Hearing her voice, the little boy became alarmed and made a U-turn to swim to his mother. It was too late. Just as he reached her, the alligator reached him.
From the dock, the mother grabbed her little boy by the arms just as the alligator snatched his legs. That began an incredible tug-of-war between the two. The alligator was much stronger than the mother, but the mother was much too passionate to let go. A farmer happened to drive by, heard her screams, raced from his truck, took aim and shot the alligator.
Remarkably, after weeks and weeks in the hospital, the little boy survived. His legs were extremely scarred by the vicious attack of the animal and, on his arms, were deep scratches where his mother's fingernails dug into his flesh in her effort to hang on to the son she loved.
The newspaper reporter who interviewed the boy after the trauma, asked if he would show him his scars. The boy lifted his pant legs. And then, with obvious pride, he said to the reporter, "But look at my arms. I have scars on my arms, too. I have them because my mom wouldn't let go."
You and I can identify with that little boy. We have scars, too. No, not from an alligator, or anything quite so dramatic. But, the scars of a painful past. Some of those scars are unsightly and have caused us deep regret.
But, some wounds, my friend, are because God has refused to let go.
In the midst of your struggle, He's been there holding on to you.
The Scripture teaches that God loves you.
If you have Christ in your life, you have become a child of God. He wants to protect you and provide for you in every way. But sometimes we foolishly wade into dangerous situations. The swimming hole of life is filled with peril - and we forget that the enemy is waiting to attack. That's when the tug-o-war begins - and if you have the scars of His love on your arms be very, very grateful.
He did not - and will not - let you go. Thank you Jesus. Amen.
Thanks,

A Reminder:“God loves you and me and everyone, every day, no matter what.”- Fr. Lorenzo D’Agostino
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#478610 Sep 26, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing above affirms Romes position unless you read into his words that which is not there.
However lets be clear what he did state explicitly
Tertullian’s View of Scripture
Tertullian unambiguously taught that the Scriptures consist of the Old Testament with the apostolic epistles and Gospels designated as the New Testament.51 In his descriptions of the Scriptures, he refers to them repeatedly again as divine, inspired, sacred, holy, the word of God and the voice of the Holy Spirit.52 He considered them fully inspired and authoritative for the establishing of doctrine and the refutation of error. His writings are replete with examples. He believed the Scriptures to be the sole authoritative source from which we derive Christian doctrine and an understanding of apostolic tradition. Ellen Flesseman–van Leer comments on the authoritative nature of Scripture for Tertullian:
Because scripture contains the revelation and is part of tradition, it has of course absolute authority...And therefore, if a doctrine or precept is written in the Bible, it cannot be but true, and if a dogma needs to be proved true, it is entirely sufficient to show that it is written. And even more important, scripture is not only sufficient evidence, but strictly necessary evidence for proving the truth of a dogma.
Ellen Flesseman–van Leer, Tradition and Scripture in the Early Church (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1953), p. 172.
http://www.christiantruth.com/scriptureandchu...
"We do not take our scriptural teaching from the parables but we interpret the parables according to our teaching." Tertullian, Purity 9,1 (c. A.D. 200).
Clay

Pasadena, TX

#478611 Sep 26, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me where they teach that Christ and God are one God...show me the Holy Trinity showing God and Christ are one God......
Show me where they say the very definition of Saviour is wrong:
soter: a deliverer, i.e. God or Christ:--saviour.
Do you know what "or" means??????!!!!
Show me where they say God is lying in the Scripture I showed you...
No. You've proven to be a cheat and a liar. I know what you're really about and it has nothin to do with truth.

Fyi, Jesus and God are one being. That's one divinity. There aren't two Gods. There aren't two divine beings.

Any other silly argument you wish to make is only an attempt at word play. Maybe one of your Protestant teammates can help you out.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#478612 Sep 26, 2013
Husker Du wrote:
<quoted text>From what you post about the Church, you didn't learn anything. By the way , its a revised Catechism because it goes in depth and has a lot more. Nothing really changed. Your post shows you do not even know what is in the Baltimore Catechism. I am just telling the truth. If you think its an insult, well that is your problem, not mine.
Adam and Eve were,created,by the,Hand of God ...not descended,from other biological forms,of life
http://catecheticsonline.com/...

AGAIN KNIT THIS,IS THE CATECHISM I LEARNED FROM
u was addressing the fact that our UN essence told me,I was lying about learning in CATHOLUC SCHOOL..which is insulting

I'M NOT STUDYING FRIM A CATECHISM TODAY

I study and learn from the,BIBLE ..

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#478613 Sep 26, 2013
Human Being wrote:
<quoted text>
RoSesz
Peace
The sower is God, the seed is the word.
There are many people that have plenty of seed in their life, may know the Bible backwards and forwards, but that does not mean they are saved. So knowing the Bible does not save a person. Rather it is after a person is saved, that the scripture becomes effective if one believes and acts upon it.
First one must be humble before God, and listen, to have one's ear opened, that faith might bring about repentance and acceptance of Jesus Christ.
There are some here that know the Bible backwards and forwards....
And,I can memorize the CATECHISM. As,I did as,a,kid ...And receive sacraments,,and go to Church every day .

You're correct ..That does,not save us,.

The gift of Grace leads,us to true,REDEEMIMG FAITH IN THE ONE AND ONLY
SAVIOUR......

And,I DOBT hate the,RCC answering your last post ..many true believers,worship as Catholics .. the,Church does great works,of Charity ..I.do NOT BELUEVE it provides the,ONLY road to Salvation

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#478614 Sep 26, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
"Through none others know we the disposition of our salvation, than those through whom the gospel came to us, first heralding it, then by the will of God delivering to us the Scriptures, which were to be the foundation and pillar of our faith...But when, the heretics are Scriptures, as if they were wrong, and unauthoritative, and were variable, and the truth could not be extracted from them by those who were ignorant of Tradition...And when we challenge them in turn what that tradition, which is from the Apostles, which is guarded by the succession of elders in the churches, they oppose themselves to Tradition, saying that they are wiser, not only than those elders, but even than the Apostles. The Tradition of the Apostles, manifested 'on the contrary' in the whole world, is open in every Church to all who see the truth...And, since it is a long matter in a work like this to enumerate these successions, we will confute them by pointing to the Tradition of that greatest and most ancient and universally known Church, founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, a tradition which she has had and a faith which she proclaims to all men from those Apostles.' Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,1-3 (inter A.D. 180/199).
"We do not take our scriptural teaching from the parables but we interpret the parables according to our teaching." Tertullian, Purity 9,1 (c. A.D. 200).
'Let them show the origins of their churches, let them unroll the list of their bishops, through a succession coming down from the very beginning that their first bishop had his authority and predecessor someone from among the number of Apostles or apostolic men and, further, that he did not stray from the Apostles. In this way the apostolic churches present their earliest records. The church of Smyrna, for example, records that Polycarp was named by John; the Romans, that Clement was ordained by Peter. In just the same way, the other churches show who were made bishops by the Apostles and who transmitted the apostolic seed to them. Let the heretics invent something like that.' Tertullian, The Prescription Against Heretics 32 (c. A.D. 200).
So in 200 there were therewith parables in scripture ..But because they had no bishops they were heretics .

So they were protestants in June second century

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#478615 Sep 26, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
No. You've proven to be a cheat and a liar. I know what you're really about and it has nothin to do with truth.
Fyi, Jesus and God are one being. That's one divinity. There aren't two Gods. There aren't two divine beings.
Any other silly argument you wish to make is only an attempt at word play. Maybe one of your Protestant teammates can help you out.
Just as I have always known.

You cannot show me where they teach that Christ and God are one God...because they do not.

You cannot show me the Holy Trinity showing God and Christ are one God......because that is impossible.

You cannot show me where they say the very definition of Saviour is wrong: soter: a deliverer, i.e. God or Christ:--saviour...because it clearly means Christ or God.

You evidently have no clue as to what "or" means??????!!!!

You cannot show me where they say God is lying in the Scripture I showed you...because God does not lie...

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#478616 Sep 26, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Regardless of what you think about Purgatory or any other teaching, you're convince the Lord left us with a set canon of scripture and relied on you and everyone else to infallibly interpret the truth based on what was documented in writing, by some of His Apostles.... I just can't see Christ relying on this scenario to convey His Ministry to the world. Especially given the fact that He never instructs anyone to compile a Bible in the first place nor which Books He wants in there. I think you're really stretching a fantasy here and ignoring many facts to arrive at your 'infallible' interpretations. I've heard you guys say the Bible interprets itself, yet all I see you doing is interpreting it and most of what you've decided is opposite than what earlier Christianity understood.
So realizing they. might die before,He returned ..they were NOT INSPIRED BY HE HOLY SPIRIT TO WRITE FOR POSTERITY...nor was Paul to compose letters .

So the monk in the basement made it all up ..despite Jesus not saying o write it down.

I see.

JESUS DID NOT KNOW WHEN HE WOULD RETURN....in His,human incarnation ..or did the monk write that down too with his wild imagination .

OR THEY ARE THE INSIRED WORDS,WRITTEN BY THE,APOSTLES AND PAUL.

WHICH IS IT ..
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#478617 Sep 26, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
So Anthony in light of Tertullians words he clearly would have rejected Romes dogma of Mary being Assumed as there is no mention of it in the Bible.
Not only that two Popes declared it heresy LOL
Then in 1950 its made dogma.
THE ASSUMPTION OF MARY
A Roman Catholic Dogma Originating with Heretics and Condemned as Heretical by 2 Popes in the 5th and 6th Centuries.
Pope Gelasius explicitly condemns the authors as well as their writings and the teachings which they promote and all who follow them. And significantly, this entire decree and its condemnation was reaffirmed by Pope Hormisdas in the sixth century around A.D. 520.(Migne Vol. 62. Col. 537-542). These facts prove that the early Church viewed the assumption teaching, not as a legitimate expression of the pious belief of the faithful but as a heresy worthy of condemnation.
So how is it that RCC tradition was the assumption of Mary to be false and then 1400 years later its dogma??
http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/assump...
Please produce the documents where popes Gelasius and Hormisdas condemned belief in the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. Thanks.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#478618 Sep 26, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Those scripture verses do not disclaim purgatory. They disclaim sola fide, but not purgatory.
Are you aware that the pope said there is no such place as purgatory????!!!!

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
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 19 min RiccardoFire 40,238
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 23 min Neelakaran 6,407
jawan bhanji ki chudai kaise karu (Apr '13) 27 min rajivas 96
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 33 min lightbeamrider 2,319
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 37 min Paul Porter1 830,752
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 59 min seotop 176,579
Bizarre things can happen to everybody everywhe... 1 hr uncover 1
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Paul Porter1 99,321
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 3 hr Rick in Kansas 270,840
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 8 hr Remnant of 144000 611,950
More from around the web