Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Jul 10, 2007 Read more: CBC News 583,226
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Read more
truth

Perth, Australia

#478846 Sep 28, 2013
https://www.google.com.au/search...

Dear God that time I disconnected power in my Father house.
In vain light is been so powerful.
Yes nobody died no as well nothing destroy no.

Are you been there dear God that day?

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#478847 Sep 28, 2013
truth wrote:
https://www.google.com.au/sear ch?q=EZEKIEL+VISION+LIGHT& client=firefox-a&hs=7LV &rls=org.mozilla:en-US:off icial&channel=np&sourc e=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X &ei=531GUsyTF6ukigfevYH4AQ &ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=5 87&bih=347&dpr=1.71#fa crc=_&imgrc=ItcWTMO8RVmzfM %3A%3BiaCjQq0lEqWUYM%3Bhttp%25 3A%252F%252Fcreationrevolution .com%252Fwp-content%252Fupload s%252F2011%252F05%252Fezekiel- vision-merkaba-300x238.jpg%3Bh ttp%253A%252F%252Fcreationrevo lution.com%252F2011%252F05%252 Fezekiel%2525E2%252580%252599s -vision-an-alien-ufo%252F%3B30 0%3B238
Its not not be thunder as other think.
Do you liked believers dear God?
I am the Thunder. I divide the words between the old truths and the new lies. It is what it is.
truth

Perth, Australia

#478848 Sep 28, 2013
My lovely thunder.
oh oh oh my two youngest brothers go under bad huuuuuuu so white deadly scare yep..
i remember i took youngest over my hands and put over bad ..ah my God don't worry brother i cry upon him nothing happen I am here until he start sleep in my arms i don't be too much old then him not..but don't be scare no.
Other i pool too from bad not only ones many times he going back again and again horible trauma over him..its been saints day night going toward dead day..my parents left so long in oldest sister house as guest..us oh..nobody care for us not at all..my two youngest brtoher is been scare over death.
Tell me what you see brother i asked..is dead day
he replay to me wild weather and thunder helping
make trauma much more over him.
no brother i replay look i am here nobody around us..yes yes yes many dead person..where..where i say..nobody come back from that bad weak up brotherrrrrrrrrrr..come here.

yes my brother after that can't speak properly he have deadly trauma over him that time yeeeeeeee.

I love my brothers i try make them free.

Now you are who, another thunder.
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#478849 Sep 28, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:!
This verse says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the Bible being THE ONE AND ONLY SOURCE that God chose to transmit HIS divine, infallible and inspired Word. It ONLY says that the scriptures are inspired!!! This is precisely why Sola Scriptura, bible only or Sola Ecclesia was NEVER believed by ANYONE until the 17th century. It is a "man-made" post reformation (invented myth)) that has "no basis" on ANY biblical or historical truth to it!! For the 1st 1700 years of the Catholic Christian Church (the word of God alone) or Sola Verbum Dei is the (the word of God) that comes to us from Christ and the Apostles through BOTH the written AND the oral tradition (unwritten) 2 Thess 2:15, which has been entrrusted to the Church that Jesus Christ HIMSELF builds upon the rock of Peter (Matt 16:13-21 and I Tim 3:15. The ineffable wisdom of God is made known through HIS CHURCH (Eph. 3:9-10
truth

Perth, Australia

#478850 Sep 28, 2013
yep
you not believe in rosary
transformation
into what
They will tell you new things coming!
yep
Why you asked where deceiver know everything?

Is that new or secret?
no
then
destruction they know as they know before

Why you liked be to much smart?

-be bless who is poor
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478851 Sep 28, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
This verse says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the Bible being THE ONE AND ONLY SOURCE that God chose to transmit HIS divine, infallible and inspired Word. It ONLY says that the scriptures are inspired!!! This is precisely why Sola Scriptura, bible only or Sola Ecclesia was NEVER believed by ANYONE until the 17th century. It is a "man-made" post reformation (invented myth)) that has "no basis" on ANY biblical or historical truth to it!! For the 1st 1700 years of the Catholic Christian Church (the word of God alone) or Sola Verbum Dei is the (the word of God) that comes to us from Christ and the Apostles through BOTH the written AND the oral tradition (unwritten) 2 Thess 2:15, which has been entrrusted to the Church that Jesus Christ HIMSELF builds upon the rock of Peter (Matt 16:13-21 and I Tim 3:15. The ineffable wisdom of God is made known through HIS CHURCH (Eph. 3:9-10
you could not be more wrong

The Apostolic Fathers and the Apologists held to sola Scriptura

The view promoted by the Council of Trent contradicted the belief and practice of the Early Church. The Early Church held to the principle of sola Scriptura. It believed that all doctrine must be proven from Scripture and if such proof could not be produced, the doctrine was to be rejected.

The Early Church Fathers (Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, the Didache, and Barnabus) taught doctrine and defended Christianity against heresies. In doing this, their sole appeal for authority was Scripture. Their writings literally breathe with the spirit of the Old and New Testaments. In the writings of the apologists such as Justin martyr and Athenagoras the same thing is found. There is no appeal in any of these writings, to the authority of Tradition as a separate and independent body of revelation.

cont...
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478852 Sep 28, 2013
Irenaeus and Tertullian held to sola Scriptura

It is with the writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian in the mid to late second century that we first encounter the concept of Apostolic Tradition (tradition handed down in the Church from the apostles in oral form). The word tradition simply means teaching. Irenaeus and Tertullian state emphatically that all the teachings of the Bishops that was given orally was rooted in Scripture and could be proven from the written Scriptures.

Both men give the actual doctrinal content of the Apostolic Tradition that was orally preached in the churches. From this, it can be seen clearly that all their doctrine was derived from Scripture. There was no doctrine in what they refer to as apostolic Tradition that is not found in Scripture.

In other words, the apostolic Tradition defined by Irenaeus and Tertullian is simply the teaching of Scripture. It was Irenaeus who stated that while the Apostles at first preached orally, their teaching was later committed to writing (the Scriptures), and the Scriptures had since that day become the pillar and ground of the Churchs faith. His exact statement is as follows:

"We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith." [1]

Tradition, when referring to oral proclamation such as preaching or teaching, was viewed primarily as the oral presentation of Scriptural truth, or the codifying of biblical truth into creedal expression. There is no appeal in the writings of Irenaeus or Tertullian to a Tradition on issues of doctrine that are not found in Scripture.

Rather, these men had to contend with the Gnostics who were the very first to suggest and teach that they possessed an Apostolic oral Tradition that was independent from Scripture. Irenaeus and Tertullian rejected such a notion and appealed to Scripture alone for the proclamation and defense of doctrine. Church historian, Ellen Flessman-van Leer affirms this fact:

"For Tertullian, Scripture is the only means for refuting or validating a doctrine as regards its content… For Irenaeus, the Church doctrine is certainly never purely traditional; on the contrary, the thought that there could be some truth, transmitted exclusively viva voce (orally), is a Gnostic line of thought… If Irenaeus wants to prove the truth of a doctrine materially, he turns to Scripture, because therein the teaching of the apostles is objectively accessible. Proof from tradition and Scripture serve one and the same end: to identify the teaching of the Church as the original apostolic teaching. The first establishes that the teaching of the Church is this apostolic teaching, and the second, what this apostolic teaching is." [2]

cont...
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478853 Sep 28, 2013
The Bible was the ultimate authority for the Church of the Early Church . It was materially sufficient, and the final arbiter in all matters of doctrinal truth. As J.N.D. Kelly has pointed out:

"The clearest token of the prestige enjoyed by Scripture is the fact that almost the entire theological effort of the Fathers, whether their aims were polemical or constructive, was expended upon what amounted to the exposition of the Bible. Further, it was everywhere taken for granted that, for any doctrine to win acceptance, it had first to establish its Scriptural basis".[3]

Heiko Oberman comments about the relationship between Scripture and Tradition in the Early Church:

"Scripture and tradition were for the Early Church in no sense mutually exclusive: kerygma (the message of the gospel), Scripture and Tradition coincided entirely. The Church preached the kerygma, which is found in toto in written form in the canonical books. The tradition was not understood as an addition to the kerygma contained in Scripture but as handing down that same kerygma in living form: in other words everything was to be found in Scripture and at the same time everything was in living Tradition".[4]

Cyril of Jerusalem held to sola Scriptura

The fact that the early Church was faithful to the principle of sola Scriptura is clearly seen from the writings of Cyril of Jerusalem (the bishop of Jerusalem in the mid 4th century). He is the author of what is known as the Catechetical Lectures. This work is an extensive series of lectures given to new believers expounding the principle doctrines of the faith. It is a complete explanation of the faith of the Church of his day. His teaching is thoroughly grounded in Scripture. There is in fact not one appeal in the entirety of the Lectures to an oral apostolic Tradition that is independent of Scripture.

He states in explicit terms that if he were to present any teaching to these catechumens which could not be validated from Scripture, they were to reject it. This fact confirms that his authority as a bishop was subject to his conformity to the written Scriptures in his teaching. The following excerpts are some of his statements on the final authority of Scripture from these lectures.

"This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures." [5]
cont...
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478854 Sep 28, 2013
"But take thou and hold that faith only as a learner and in profession, which is by the Church delivered to thee, and is established from all Scripture. For since all cannot read the Scripture, but some as being unlearned, others by business, are hindered from the knowledge of them; in order that the soul may not perish for lack of instruction, in the Articles which are few we comprehend the whole doctrine of Faith…And for the present, commit to memory the Faith, merely listening to the words; and expect at the fitting season the proof of each of its parts from the Divine Scriptures. For the Articles of the Faith were not composed at the good pleasure of men: but the most important points chosen from all Scriptures, make up the one teaching of the Faith. And, as the mustard seed in a little grain contains many branches, thus also this Faith, in a few words, hath enfolded in its bosom the whole knowledge of godliness contained both in the Old and New Testaments. Behold, therefore, brethren and hold the traditions which ye now receive, and write them on the table of your hearts".[6]

Notice in the above passage that Cyril states that catechumens are receiving tradition, and he exhorts them to hold to the traditions, which they are now receiving. From what source is this tradition derived? Obviously it is derived from the Scriptures, the teaching or tradition or revelation of God, which was committed to the Apostles and passed on to the Church, and which is now accessible in Scripture alone.

It is significant that Cyril of Jerusalem, who is communicating the entirety of the faith to these new believers, did not make a single appeal to an oral tradition to support his teachings. The entirety of the faith is grounded upon Scripture and Scripture alone.

cont....
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478855 Sep 28, 2013
Gregory of Nyssa held to sola Scriptura

Gregory of Nyssa also enunciated this principle. He stated:

"The generality of men still fluctuate in their opinions about this, which are as erroneous as they are numerous. As for ourselves, if the Gentile philosophy, which deals methodically with all these points, were really adequate for a demonstration, it would certainly be superfluous to add a discussion on the soul to those speculations. But while the latter proceeded, on the subject of the soul, as far in the direction of supposed consequences as the thinker pleased, we are not entitled to such license, I mean that of affirming what we please; we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings." [7]
The Early Church operated on basis of sola Scriptura

These above quotations are simply representative of the Church fathers as a whole. Cyprian, Origen, Hippolytus, Athanasius, Firmilian, and Augustine are just a few of these that could be cited as proponents of the principle of sola Scriptura in addition to Tertullian, Irenaeus, Cyril and Gregory of Nyssa. The Early Church operated on the basis of the principle of sola Scriptura. It was this historical principle that the Reformers sought to restore to the Church. The extensive use of Scripture by the fathers of the Early Church from the very beginning are seen in the following facts:

Irenaeus: He knew Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John. He lived from c 130 to 202 AD. He quotes from twenty-four of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament, taking over 1,800 quotations from the New Testament alone.

Clement of Alexandria: He lived from 150 to 215 AD. He cites all the New Testament, books except Philemon, James and 2 Peter. He gives 2,400 citations from the New Testament.

Tertullian: He lived from 160 to 220 AD. He makes over 7,200 New Testament citations.

Origen: He lived from 185 to 254 AD. He succeeded Clement of Alexandria at the Catechetical school at Alexandria. He makes nearly 18,000 New Testament citations.

By the end of the 3rd century, virtually the entire New Testament could be reconstructed from the writings of the Church Fathers.

cont...
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478856 Sep 28, 2013
Customs and Practices as Apostolic Oral Tradition

It is true that the Early Church also held to the concept of tradition as referring to ecclesiastical customs and practices. It was often believed that such practices were actually handed down from the Apostles, even though they could not necessarily be validated from the Scriptures. These practices, however, did not involve the doctrines of the faith, and were often contradictory among different segments of the Church.

An example of this is found early on in the 2nd century in the controversy over when to celebrate Easter. Certain Eastern churches celebrated it on a different day from those in the West, but each claimed that their particular practice was handed down to them directly from the apostles. This actually led to conflict with the Bishop of Rome who demanded that the Eastern Bishops submit to the Western practice. This they refused to do, firmly believing that they were adhering to apostolic Tradition.

Which one is correct? There is no way to determine which, if either, was truly of Apostolic origin. It is interesting, however, to note that one of the proponents for the Eastern view was Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John. There are other examples of this sort of claim in Church history. Just because a certain Church Father claims that a particular practice is of apostolic origin does not mean that it necessarily was. All it meant was that he believes that it was. But there was no way to verify if in fact it was a tradition from the Apostles.

There are numerous practices in which the Early Church engaged which it believed were of Apostolic origin (listed by Basil the Great), but which no one practices today. Clearly therefore, such appeals to oral apostolic Tradition that refer to customs and practices are meaningless.

cont....
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478857 Sep 28, 2013
Roman Catholic Church’s appeal to Tradition as an authority is not valid.
Roman Catholic Church states that it possesses an oral apostolic Tradition which is independent of Scripture, and which is binding upon men. It appeals to Paul's statement in 2 Thessalonians 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle".

Rome asserts, based on Paul's teaching in this passage, the teaching of sola Scriptura is false, since he handed on teachings to the Thessalonians in both oral and written form. But what is interesting in such an assertion is that Roman apologists never document the specific doctrines to which Paul is referring which they claim they possess, and which they say are binding upon men. From Francis de Sales to the writings of Karl Keating and Robert Sungenis there is a very conspicuous absence of documentation of the specific doctrines to which the Apostle Paul is referring.

Sungenis edited a work recently on a defense of the Roman Catholic teaching of tradition entitled Not By Scripture Alone. It is touted as a definitive refutation of the Protestant teaching of sola Scriptura. His book is 627 pages in length. Not once in the entire book does any author define the doctrinal content of this supposed apostolic Tradition that is binding on all men! Yet, we are told that it exists, that the Roman Catholic Church possesses it, and that we are bound, therefore, to submit to this church which alone possesses the fullness of God's revelation from the Apostles.

What Sungenis and other Roman Catholic authors fail to define, is the contents and precise doctrines of the claimed “apostolic Tradition”. The simple reason that they do not do so is because it does not exist. If such traditions existed and were of such importance why did Cyril of Jerusalem not mention them in his Catechetical Lectures?

We defy anyone to list the doctrines to which Paul is referring in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 which he says he committed orally to the Thessalonians. The only special revelation man possesses today from God that was committed to the Apostles is the written Scriptures.

This was the belief and practice of the early Church . This principle was adhered to by the Reformers. They sought to restore it to the Church after doctrinal corruption had entered through the door of tradition.

The teaching of a separate body of apostolic revelation known as Tradition that is oral in nature originated not with the Christian Church but rather with Gnosticism. This was an attempt by the Gnostics to bolster their authority by asserting that the Scriptures were not sufficient. They stated that they possessed the fullness of Apostolic revelation because they not only had the written revelation of the Apostles in the Scriptures but also their oral tradition, and additionally, the key for interpreting and understanding that revelation.

Just as the Early Church Fathers repudiated that teaching and claim by an exclusive reliance upon and appeal to the written Scriptures, so must we.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me" John 10:27.

Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, editors, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody: Hendriksen, 1995) Vol. 1, Irenaeus,“Against Heresies” 3.1.1, p. 414.[up]
Ellen Flessman-van Leer, Tradition and Scripture in the Early Church (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1953) pp. 184, 133, 144.[up]
J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1978), pp. 42, 46.[up]

Heiko Oberman, The Harvest of Medieval Theology (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1963), p. 366.[up]
A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church (Oxford: Parker, 1845), "The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril" Lecture 4.17.[up]
Ibid., Lecture 5.12.[up]

Author: William Webster.
Concerned in Brasil

Aberdeen, UK

#478858 Sep 28, 2013
Well there you go Hojo

Study and get back to me I can give you online links to all the early church fathers books in the above post.

But the argument is sound you are wrong.
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#478859 Sep 28, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
Well there you go Hojo
Study and get back to me I can give you online links to all the early church fathers books in the above post.
But the argument is sound you are wrong.
You forgot the list Jesus left us for our Bible. You don't happen to have one do you?
truth

Perth, Australia

#478860 Sep 28, 2013
evil is evil
long time aho evil come in matrix
its try posess every spirit and every soul

evil is evil
serve your evil

not me

in this city nothing exist

don't be deceive dear children
its stay in evil circle of para evil program
truth

Perth, Australia

#478861 Sep 28, 2013
evil is evil

-don't be deceived
they try ruin every person and every family

they will tell you they coming in peace but not peace or have little peace

evil is evil

they will come in my name its not meeeeeeee
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooo
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#478862 Sep 28, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
Gregory of Nyssa held to sola Scriptura
Gregory of Nyssa also enunciated this principle. He stated:
"The generality of men still fluctuate in their opinions about this, which are as erroneous as they are numerous. As for ourselves, if the Gentile philosophy, which deals methodically with all these points, were really adequate for a demonstration, it would certainly be superfluous to add a discussion on the soul to those speculations. But while the latter proceeded, on the subject of the soul, as far in the direction of supposed consequences as the thinker pleased, we are not entitled to such license, I mean that of affirming what we please; we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings." [7]
The Early Church operated on basis of sola Scriptura
These above quotations are simply representative of the Church fathers as a whole. Cyprian, Origen, Hippolytus, Athanasius, Firmilian, and Augustine are just a few of these that could be cited as proponents of the principle of sola Scriptura in addition to Tertullian, Irenaeus, Cyril and Gregory of Nyssa. The Early Church operated on the basis of the principle of sola Scriptura. It was this historical principle that the Reformers sought to restore to the Church. The extensive use of Scripture by the fathers of the Early Church from the very beginning are seen in the following facts:
Irenaeus: He knew Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John. He lived from c 130 to 202 AD. He quotes from twenty-four of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament, taking over 1,800 quotations from the New Testament alone.
Clement of Alexandria: He lived from 150 to 215 AD. He cites all the New Testament, books except Philemon, James and 2 Peter. He gives 2,400 citations from the New Testament.
Tertullian: He lived from 160 to 220 AD. He makes over 7,200 New Testament citations.
Origen: He lived from 185 to 254 AD. He succeeded Clement of Alexandria at the Catechetical school at Alexandria. He makes nearly 18,000 New Testament citations.
By the end of the 3rd century, virtually the entire New Testament could be reconstructed from the writings of the Church Fathers.
cont...
Concerned, for every paragraph you provide where an early Church father speaks of scripture, i can give you ten more where they speak of the Church and tradition. You only fool you and other vulnerable posters by implying these men went by the Bible alone.

There is still one major problem that the fundie fanatics face: If the Lord left us with a set of Books to figure out His Ministry, who's interpretations are infallible? Remember, we are not stupid, so don't pretend the Holy Spirit is guiding all ya to Biblical truth and we Catholics "aren't born again' to see it your way. lol

I mean, that's cute and all, but lets keep it real here. The Lord never taught sola scripture and neither did His Apostles. If that were the case, why did only a few of the Disciples document in writing?

I think you are nothing but a lying bigot, not a Christan scholar.
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#478863 Sep 28, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
Study and get back to me I can give you online links to all the early church fathers books in the above post.
But the argument is sound you are wrong.
Btw, why do you hammer away at the title "Roman Catholic"? Do you even know what that means? Roman is the rite. It's not a separate Church.
Do you have a problem with the Byzantine Catholics? or the Syrian rite, Alexandrian? Greek, Maronite, Coptic? They are all true Catholic Churches too ya know.. There are 23 Catholic Churches in all. The Church at Rome is headed by the Pope and is the most recognizable.
The title "Roman" became widespread in the English speaking world. It was actually first used as a slur against Catholics who are in communion with the Bishop of Rome. Anglicans wished to make themselves the true Church so they put the title of Roman on us as well as "Papist Catholics" "Romanist" and other names that didn't stick. Since most of the Western Church follows the diocese of Rome, and we practice the Roman rite Mass,'Roman Catholic' was never really a problem to the Church (they've been called allot worse).
"Roman Catholic" fits better with fundies because they teach that the Church is the whore of Babylon; the Harlot that is bringing everyone to hell with the Pope. Gullible morons will buy into men like you when you show them Rev 17:9. The Church itself does not call herself "the Roman Catholic Church" as an official title. Roman is the adjective describing a certain diocese and rite. Fundies need to create a perception of a conquering army with the Roman Pope as their leader; swords, shields and catapults waiting to take your Bible's away. Thats how they killed 85% of the population of Europe - according to you! lol

www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/churb3.htm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_ (term)
truth

Perth, Australia

#478864 Sep 28, 2013
i don't say Lord.
nooooooooooooooooooo
I say Gospodine.
As gospel Jesus Christ start walking trough Earth.
Where is that Law?
INRI
Is that been long time ago?
yep
then who stolen what not to be happy..
now i am not care whats so ever

corupt evil law
with corupt para evil program

byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#478865 Sep 28, 2013

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) 7 min Stilgar Fifrawi 826,567
want to taktoJeff Mills 8 min jean4 1
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 9 min lovewithin 40,115
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 11 min ChristineM 442,628
News Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 20 min AN NFL FAN 121,625
Any girls wanna sex Skype? (Jan '13) 55 min girls united states 114
sex (May '13) 58 min girls united states 147
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr trifecta1 611,793
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 3 hr lightbeamrider 176,433
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 6 hr robertxiong 98,926
More from around the web