Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 545,098
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story
Liam

Saint Paul, MN

#503158 Dec 30, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
And how,do you approach your infallible authority...
Seriously ..don't you sed,a,bot of idolatry in your reverence for a,FALLIBLE MAN ..the POPE .
NIT all of hem were even Godly in behaviour .
Hornsby things have Bern changed added,..just in my lifetime..
Oh wait those were just theories,??
The,added dogma,like the Ascencion of Mary ...or did she die,?
I was,taught she didn't ..now,some say she did ..
I once thought the Church never did wrong ..was infallible...etc..I no.longer believe this.
Many good holy people in the RCC ( and here's,another thing CLAY ..I looked a my baptismal certificate ...ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH..bet that's on a lot of them.)))
I'm not saying the Pope is,bad ...just NO ONE ..NO MEN are infallible
One would think you'd be interested in your history. You seem to embrace ignorance Rose. I told you why your Baptismal certificate said "Roman Catholic" but you completely ignore it...choosing instead to believe the fundamental ideologist. The official title of the Church is "Catholic Church", not "Roman" Catholic. The title "Roman" is fairly new.(1700 AD believe). It was first used as a slur towards the Catholic Church in Rome. They also called them "Papist and Romish". Even today, "Roman Catholic" is largely a Western term or title. In the East, its just called "the Catholic Church in Rome".
What you radical fundamentals fail to understand is that Roman Catholic is NOT a separate Church from the 23 other Catholic Churches.
But......believe what you want Rose, thats the fundamental Christian creed... believing what they want.

“Let the Children”

Since: Aug 08

Come To Me

#503159 Dec 30, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
June my brother when he died about a year ago, was married to a Jewish woman; who believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. The day my brother died he was at home, his wife and daughter prepared the body.
They washed him & dressed him , when they were ready to let him go they called the Funeral home who went to the house and took him straight to the crematorium all done before the sun set the same day.
If you knew what you were talking about you would realize, Jesus was a Jew, on His cross it read King of the Jews , when Pilot asked Him if He was the King of the Jews , Jesus said I am.
As Christians we are adopted into the family of God; so tell me smart one am I of the Jewish religion?? " NO I AM NOT,GOD STARTED A NATION !!!! NOT A RELIGION,,,, AT NO TIME IN HISTORY HAS GOD EVER STARTED A RELIGION.
I AM A BORN AGAIN CHRISTAIN, WHO BELIEVES THE KING OF THE JEWS DIED FOR ME . SALVATION IS FROM THE JEWS. I HAVE BEEN ADOPTED INTO THE FAMILY.
JESUS CALLED GOD FATHER AND SO DO I.
YOUR SO FULL OF RELIGIOUS CRAP JUNE, YOU HAVE LOST SIGHT OF GOD, AND HIS GIFT OF SALVATION THROUGH HIS SON JESUS.
Happy New,Year ..LT...
Liam

Saint Paul, MN

#503160 Dec 30, 2013
OldJG wrote:
The Bible IS one book. It is one book written by 40 authors by divine inspiration. It was God who inspired the writers and it was God who decided which books would make up His word to us. The Bible is one continuous love letter to us.
Who wrote the Bible? And how did it come to us?

Fr. Ken Ryan in his book "Catholic Questions, Catholic Answers"

"Here is a summary of how the Bible came to us. First of all, we have absolutely none of the original manuscripts. Their disappearance is easy to understand in the case of the OT texts, what with their antiquity, the destruction of Jerusalem, and the dispersal of the Jewish race.
In the case of the NT, the originals were probably worn out by constant use or destroyed in the persecution the Church suffered in the early centuries. We have only rather inaccurate copies of inaccurate copies.
In the first two centuries when the NT was being copied, the writing materials were reeds or quils and sheets of papyrus. The papyrus was a plant with pith in its stem that could be cut into strips and dried. The strips were laid down vertically side by side with horizontal layer placed on top and the whole arrangement gummed together and sandpapered. The work usually resulted in sheets of about ten x five inches which didnt wear too well. The sheets could be glued together into strips which could be rolled up. St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans would be about 12 feet long and the Gospel of Mathew about 30 feet long!

About the yr 300 it became common to put the sheets into codex form. But these early collections seldom or never contained the whole Bible, The "canon" or list of truly inspired books was still being determined in 300 AD. About this time, there was a change from papurus to parchment. Only about the year 800 AD were copyist able to import a kind of paper from Asia.
Fewer than twenty papyrus rolls or codices containing parts of the NT, and only about 4,000 parchment or paper copies made before the days of printing, still exist. Nearly half of these are lechtionaries which have only those parts of the NT that were read at Mass. ALL of these have copyist and editorial mistakes. Also it was the custom - pretty certain in the case of St. Paul - for authors to dictate their works to people who were skilled in writing. Errors could be introduced by a careless stenographer. The true original was in SPOKEN, not written form.
The scarcity and incompleteness of manuscripts- in addition to the stenographic transpostions - made it very hard to "look up" anything in the Bible. Until the 13th century the books of the Bible were not even divided into chapters. Neither the chapter nor the verse divisions were always made according to the thought of the authors..

Chapter and verse quotations of the Scriptures became in more modern times the stock in trade of the apologists and proselytizers alike. It could have been Mark Twain who first told the story of the two Preachers who knew their Bibles "backwards and forwards". Their debate went:
"I cannot agree with you on Genesis 18: 39"
"Have you considered Deuteronomy 7:27"?
"Yes, indeed, but then how do you account for Leviticus 18:31?"
By taking it in connection with Exodus 7:42"
"You win, I hadn't thought of that"
If you are talking of a modern, neatly bound Bible, you either have to say its a product of the Catholic Church or believe it dropped down already printed from Heaven, as some people seem to think"

Does sola scripture still make sense, old jeep? Bible alone is impossible. It doesnt make sense that the Lord would install this concept. Get over your silly stero types of the Catholic faith.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#503161 Dec 30, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
So if it was not Jesus who started the Catholic religion ... that means that mortal men, disgruntled with Judaism started the new Catholic religion ... of their own accord.
The tale of Jesus was cunningly used by the ex-Jew-Catholics as a necessary RUSE.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>
ruse
noun: ruse; plural noun: ruses
an action intended to deceive someone; a trick.
https://www.google.ca/#q=ruse+definition
Ruse you say, so the Apostles were martyred for a ruse. You are completely ignorant of biblical truths. You are such a pitiful person to speak of things about the bible in which you know nothing of or care to, what's with you?

“Let the Children”

Since: Aug 08

Come To Me

#503162 Dec 30, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
June my brother when he died about a year ago, was married to a Jewish woman; who believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. The day my brother died he was at home, his wife and daughter prepared the body.
They washed him & dressed him , when they were ready to let him go they called the Funeral home who went to the house and took him straight to the crematorium all done before the sun set the same day.
If you knew what you were talking about you would realize, Jesus was a Jew, on His cross it read King of the Jews , when Pilot asked Him if He was the King of the Jews , Jesus said I am.
As Christians we are adopted into the family of God; so tell me smart one am I of the Jewish religion?? " NO I AM NOT,GOD STARTED A NATION !!!! NOT A RELIGION,,,, AT NO TIME IN HISTORY HAS GOD EVER STARTED A RELIGION.
I AM A BORN AGAIN CHRISTAIN, WHO BELIEVES THE KING OF THE JEWS DIED FOR ME . SALVATION IS FROM THE JEWS. I HAVE BEEN ADOPTED INTO THE FAMILY.
JESUS CALLED GOD FATHER AND SO DO I.
YOUR SO FULL OF RELIGIOUS CRAP JUNE, YOU HAVE LOST SIGHT OF GOD, AND HIS GIFT OF SALVATION THROUGH HIS SON JESUS.
And sorry about your brother ...
May He,rest with the,Lord.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#503163 Dec 30, 2013
The Catholic church is nothing more than a man made church, teaching false doctrine. The bible never speaks of a Catholic church or a pope, one reason is Peter was never in Rome. Do you honestly believe that God needs a pope? The only church spoken of in the bible is the Church of Christ which was established in the year 33AD on the day of Pentecost in which Peter was preaching and 3,000 souls were added that day to the church. Romans 16;16 The first pope didn't even come about until 606 AD. I urge you to prove the Church of Christ wrong about being the one and only true church of the bible. Look at what the Catholic church is teaching people such as infant baptism, why would a child need baptizing, they wouldn't. This is just one of many flaws of the Catholic church.
StarC

Mesa, AZ

#503164 Dec 30, 2013
"THE STRUCTURE OF THE CHURCH

Jesus chose the apostles to be the earthly leaders of the Church. He gave them his own authority to teach and to govern—not as dictators, but as

loving pastors and fathers. That is why Catholics

call their spiritual leaders "father." In doing so we follow Paul’s example: "I became your father in Jesus Christ through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:15).

The apostles, fulfilling Jesus’ will, ordained bishops, priests, and deacons and thus handed on their apostolic ministry to them—the fullest degree of ordination to the bishops, lesser degrees to the priests and deacons.

The Pope and Bishops

Jesus gave Peter special authority among the apostles (John 21:15–17) and signified this by changing his name from Simon to Peter, which means "rock" (John 1:42). He said Peter was to be the rock on which he would build his Church (Matt. 16:18)."
StarC

Mesa, AZ

#503165 Dec 30, 2013
http://m.youtube.com/watch...

Dr Peter Kreeft Ph. D Boston College convert
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#503166 Dec 30, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Who wrote the Bible? And how did it come to us?
Fr. Ken Ryan in his book "Catholic Questions, Catholic Answers"
"Here is a summary of how the Bible came to us. First of all, we have absolutely none of the original manuscripts. Their disappearance is easy to understand in the case of the OT texts, what with their antiquity, the destruction of Jerusalem, and the dispersal of the Jewish race.
In the case of the NT, the originals were probably worn out by constant use or destroyed in the persecution the Church suffered in the early centuries. We have only rather inaccurate copies of inaccurate copies.
In the first two centuries when the NT was being copied, the writing materials were reeds or quils and sheets of papyrus. The papyrus was a plant with pith in its stem that could be cut into strips and dried. The strips were laid down vertically side by side with horizontal layer placed on top and the whole arrangement gummed together and sandpapered. The work usually resulted in sheets of about ten x five inches which didnt wear too well. The sheets could be glued together into strips which could be rolled up. St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans would be about 12 feet long and the Gospel of Mathew about 30 feet long!
About the yr 300 it became common to put the sheets into codex form. But these early collections seldom or never contained the whole Bible, The "canon" or list of truly inspired books was still being determined in 300 AD. About this time, there was a change from papurus to parchment. Only about the year 800 AD were copyist able to import a kind of paper from Asia.
Fewer than twenty papyrus rolls or codices containing parts of the NT, and only about 4,000 parchment or paper copies made before the days of printing, still exist. Nearly half of these are lechtionaries which have only those parts of the NT that were read at Mass. ALL of these have copyist and editorial mistakes. Also it was the custom - pretty certain in the case of St. Paul - for authors to dictate their works to people who were skilled in writing. Errors could be introduced by a careless stenographer. The true original was in SPOKEN, not written form.
The scarcity and incompleteness of manuscripts- in addition to the stenographic transpostions - made it very hard to "look up" anything in the Bible. Until the 13th century the books of the Bible were not even divided into chapters. Neither the chapter nor the verse divisions were always made according to the thought of the authors..
Chapter and verse quotations of the Scriptures became in more modern times the stock in trade of the apologists and proselytizers alike. It could have been Mark Twain who first told the story of the two Preachers who knew their Bibles "backwards and forwards". Their debate went:
"I cannot agree with you on Genesis 18: 39"
"Have you considered Deuteronomy 7:27"?
"Yes, indeed, but then how do you account for Leviticus 18:31?"
By taking it in connection with Exodus 7:42"
"You win, I hadn't thought of that"
If you are talking of a modern, neatly bound Bible, you either have to say its a product of the Catholic Church or believe it dropped down already printed from Heaven, as some people seem to think"
Does sola scripture still make sense, old jeep? Bible alone is impossible. It doesnt make sense that the Lord would install this concept. Get over your silly stero types of the Catholic faith.
Hey Oldcly, Sola Scripture makes more sense than ever before. Thank you.

FYI.. http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scrip...
StarC

Mesa, AZ

#503167 Dec 30, 2013
"The doctrine of Papal Infallibility does not mean the Pope is always right in all his personal teachings. Catholics are quite aware that, despite his great learning, the Pope is very much a human being and therefore liable to commit human error. On some subjects, like sports

and manufacturing, his judgment is liable to be very faulty.

The doctrine simply means that the Pope is divinely protected from error when, acting in his official capacity as chief shepherd of the Catholic fold, he promulgates a decision which is binding on the conscience of all Catholics throughout the world. In other words, his infallibility is limited to his specialty– the Faith of Jesus Christ.

In order for the Pope to be infallible on a particular statement, however, four conditions must apply: 1) he must be speaking ex cathedra ... that is, "from the Chair" of Peter, or in other words, officially, as head of the entire Church;

2) the decision must be for the whole Church;

3) it must be on a matter of faith or morals;

4) the Pope must have the intention of making a final decision on a teaching of faith or morals, so that it is to be held by all the faithful. It must be interpretive, not originative; the

Pope has no authority to originate new doctrine. He is not the author of revelation – only its

guardian and expounder. He has no power to distort a single word of Scripture, or change

one iota of divine tradition. His infallibility is limited strictly to the province of doctrinal

interpretation, and it is used quite rarely. It is used in order to clarify, to "define," some point

of the ancient Christian tradition. It is the infallibility of which Christ spoke when He said to

Peter, the first Pope: "I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever

thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven." (Matt. 16:19). Certainly Christ

would not have admonished His followers to "hear the church" (Matt. 18:17) without

somehow making certain that what they heard was the truth – without somehow making the

teaching magisterium of His Church infallible"
truth

Perth, Australia

#503168 Dec 30, 2013
pen
no
Don't be afraid!
Angel say to Mary!

Don't sleep!
Until they sleep in boat huge darkness and heavy rain..water start wobeling on sea..yee..
Lord is been with them..don't be afraid!

Who told you Lord rise where is Simon.

On Jesus graveyards Jesus is not be there only mother and some woman too.
Mother is not be afraid ..bright light two of them come what you waiting my lovly Lady.
My Lord have to come.

He is not here ..He is risen.
truth

Perth, Australia

#503170 Dec 30, 2013
Then he say;I am going where you can't go.

then
How I can go there.
promise is..
I will send you protector and I will be with you all time.

now we past week of Family day..Holy day all of us small big and Authority too some with family celebrity because God left like that.

'what god make in marrige unity you don't have rights for split'
its from bigining as Sun moon and stars..as Father mother and child.

God created Heaven and Earth his promise is fullfil everything as it is.

We as humans animals tree as cells alive on this Earth which God plaint as one Creation.
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#503171 Dec 30, 2013
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
MUQ said, quote, "There was No Eyewitness amongst the Disciple of Jesus who had Witnessed either the Crucifixion of Jesus or his resurrection." End quote.
Really? You better check with allah again. LOL LOL LOL
1. John 19:25-27, "25 but standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother and THE DISCIPLE WHOM HE LOVED standing nearby, he said to his mother,“Woman, behold, your son!” 27 Then he said to the disciple,“Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home."
2. John 20:1-10, Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. 2 So she ran and WENT TO SIMON PETER AND THE OTHER DISCIPLE, THE ONE JESUS LOVED, and said to them,“They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” 3 So Peter went out with the other disciple, and they were going toward the tomb. 4 Both of them were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5 And stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, 7 and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself. 8 Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; 9 for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead. 10 Then the disciples went back to their homes."
1. John was standing with Mary at the crucifixion of Jesus.
2. We know the stone from the tomb of Jesus was rolled away. Was the stone rolled away so Jesus could get out? Oh NO! The stone from tomb of Jesus was rolled away so THEY, Peter and John, could get in. They were an eye witness to an empty tomb.
Was John present at the scene?

Did John the Disciple of Jesus wrote the Gospel of John?

How dumb you people get!!

All these Gospel writers are writing from "Hear say"....NONE of them name their sources and NONE of them says that "This is what Holy Ghost told me".

It is PEOPLE who make that claim on their behalf!!

Have you never worked in court and what is evidence and what is eye witness account?

“Let the Children”

Since: Aug 08

Come To Me

#503172 Dec 30, 2013
W O W. W O W. W O W

EVERYONE READ

http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/2013/12...

BE sure TO CLICK ON THE MOVIE LINKS !!!!!!

In the Story .

I cannot believe this ......praise GOD
truth

Perth, Australia

#503174 Dec 30, 2013
it is written they will prosecuted righteousness people..
then
Which sort of court is?..accusers scriber pharisee this and that..

I told to you everything will past my words not.

paul Saul did you prosecuted me..
who are you
I am 'Nazareneeeeeeeeeeeeee.

INRI

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#503175 Dec 30, 2013
StarC wrote:
"THE STRUCTURE OF THE CHURCH
Jesus chose the apostles to be the earthly leaders of the Church. He gave them his own authority to teach and to govern—not as dictators, but as
loving pastors and fathers. That is why Catholics
call their spiritual leaders "father." In doing so we follow Paul’s example: "I became your father in Jesus Christ through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:15).
The apostles, fulfilling Jesus’ will, ordained bishops, priests, and deacons and thus handed on their apostolic ministry to them—the fullest degree of ordination to the bishops, lesser degrees to the priests and deacons.
The Pope and Bishops
Jesus gave Peter special authority among the apostles (John 21:15–17) and signified this by changing his name from Simon to Peter, which means "rock" (John 1:42). He said Peter was to be the rock on which he would build his Church (Matt. 16:18)."
Call no man father means not to be used to signify anyone in a religious manner. Peter was not the rock, Paul is clear in 1 Corinthians 3:11 "For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." We can't look to a mere human being as the foundation of the Christian church! "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man." (Psalm 118:8). Like David said, "The Lord is my rock" (Psalm 18:2) "And who is a rock, except our God?" (Psalm 18:31). The bible is clear on the names to be used in different offices in the church and they are elders, deacons, teachers and preachers.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#503176 Dec 30, 2013
Leave a comment
Call No Man Your Father?
Posted by Jason S. on January 25, 2013 in Roman Catholicism
I wrote an article titled: Did the Church Give Us the Bible? a couple months back that has led to some interesting discussions with Roman Catholics in which I was accused of misrepresenting their positions. Because of this, I have decided to write a series of articles on the beliefs and false practices of the Catholic church and its sheep that follow its voice without question.
The first article is based on a common response they give to a Christians grievance with them calling their priests and teachers ‘father’ as a title of honor and reverence.
I wrote in my above mentioned article:
Why does it [the Bible] forbid us to address religious leaders as “father”?(Matt. 23:9).
Here is the normal Catholic response that I got:
Jesus is here, too, speaking against the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Jesus certainly didn’t mean “call no man on earth your father”— which would include your physical, earthly father. There are plenty of references in Scripture to Christians calling other Christians “father” or calling others their spiritual “children”— for example, 1 Cor 4:15, Philemon 10, Philippians 2:22, 1 Timothy 1:2. We call our priests “father” similarly as an honor, because they are spiritual “fathers” to us.“Father” is not their official title — it is usually “Reverend,” just like it probably is for your pastor.
This normal Catholic response is interesting because pretty much what they are saying is “Jesus didn’t mean what He said,” then he in no way tries to describe what he believes Jesus was saying. What did Jesus mean if He didn’t mean what He said? He says, speaking of spiritual teachers,“call no man your father.”
Instead of dealing with the passage, this Catholic just says it doesn’t mean what it says, and then turns the argument back on the person who gives it (me) saying,“you call your earthly father your father, right?” This is a good way to not answer the argument. Nonetheless, my answer to this argument is simple. The context shows that Jesus is referring to spiritual leaders that desired to receive this title. There are plenty of passages of scripture where earthly, blood relatives are called father, so to say it includes your earthly father would make Jesus contradict other scriptures and examples that show God approves of calling your earthly parent or ancestors “fathers.”
One point that I do agree with Catholics is this: We do see instances of Paul calling himself a father of certain people that he had taught the gospel to or had discipled in some way (references given by Catholic above). But we DO NOT see an instance where a Christian called their spiritual leader their father to show them honor or reverence.
The verses supplied do not justify calling a spiritual teacher or leader “father.” To use these verses to teach it is acceptable contradicts what Jesus said. This Catholic’s response made it clear that he and other Catholics call their priests ‘father’ to honor them. This is what Jesus is saying not to do. Also, to say “father” is not an official title (as the catholic above argues) is just incorrect. There are plenty of websites of Catholic parishes that have the name of their priest on the site as “Father __________ and if you ask a priest what he would like you to call him, there is a good chance he will say ‘father.’
Here is an example of what I found on the website of a local parish in my area:
•Fr. Albert Zapf – Pastor;
•Fr. Ladis J. Cizik – In Residence

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#503177 Dec 30, 2013
Final part,,
These priests are using ‘Fr.’ as a title just like someone would use Mr. or Mrs., or as some pastors would use Rev. for reverend. It is being used as a title of honor.
Just as an aside. I do not believe it is a good idea to call a pastor ‘reverend’ either. It is just as much giving a spiritual leader a title to honor them as it is calling a priest ‘father.’ It is a word that is used to describe God also:“…Holy and Reverend is His name.”(Ps.111:9). It is another manmade title that people use to distinguish laity from clergy, which is not something that scripture does. All church “leaders” in scripture are to be servants of the flock, not in any way lifting themselves above their brethren. All members of the church are brothers.

It seems clear to me that the point of the context (Matt 23:5-12) is that spiritual leaders should have the heart of servants and not desire to be called names or given titles that raise them above their brethren, nor should they wear things that do the same.

If calling priests ‘father’ was not bad enough, Catholics call the pope the ‘Holy Father’ as a title, which is a name only given to God the Father in scripture in John 17. Jesus, praying to the Father in Heaven says “Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are”(John 17:11). If the pope willingly allows himself to be called by this title, he is a blasphemer. He is giving himself the title of God [He is also called the head of the church, which is a title given to Jesus Christ- Ephesians 1:22].

“But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. 6 They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, 7 greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men,‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’ 8 But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. 11 But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted”(Matt 23:5-12)
truth

Perth, Australia

#503178 Dec 30, 2013
nothing is greater then love
love your God with heart and mind
truth

Perth, Australia

#503179 Dec 30, 2013
God planted everything.

good seed and very bad seed
9 seeds

thanks God I am good thinker

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) 9 min Stilgar Fifrawi 743,925
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 10 min waaasssuuup 601,430
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 11 min Lyndi 174,203
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 16 min Tim Osman 118,294
Is it time for Muslim Internment Camps? 19 min Kid_Tomorrow 14
How to tell when a Topix poster doesn't have a ... 22 min Doctor REALITY 25
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 23 min Catcher1 228,577
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Pegasus 260,199
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 1 hr Hot Top 2020 979

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE