Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 683930 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.

LTM

Marathon, Canada

#421215 Feb 9, 2013
Guest wrote:
<quoted text>It's true that we have no record of the thief being baptized, for he certainly had no opportunity to do so after accepting Jesus as his Lord and Saviour. He could not come down from the cross where he was being executed by the Roman authorities. Had he been able to descend from that cross, he would have done many things. He would have turned from his life of crime, made restitution for all he had stolen, and walked in full conformity to truth he now understood. But since it was physically impossible to do any of those things, the obedient life of Jesus was imputed to him. That is why God could accept him and Jesus could give him such a glorious assurance of salvation. The baptism of Jesus was credited to him - an act that would have been required of the thief had he been able to fulfill it.
By the way, the same transaction would take place today if the circumstances were similar. Suppose a man should approach me this very day, requesting baptism. His desire is so urgent and compelling that he begs me to do it immediately. We get in my car to drive to a nearby lake where there is a convenient place to conduct the service. But on the way to the lake there is a terrible accident. My passenger is killed in that accident. Would he be lost because he had not yet been immersed with his Lord? Of course not. He had made the decision and was in the process of obeying the Lord when he died. God never requires the impossible from anyone. But on the basis of what we have learned from the lips of Jesus, one can confidently conclude that if a person has the opportunity to be baptized and refuses to be, that man cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.
http://abc.eznettools.net/mobxpozd/baptism.ht...
the only reason a person asks to be baptised is because he is a believer and is saved.
Water Baptism is not salvation it is a outward sign of an inward change that can only be caused by the Holy Spirit.
Your friend was saved , his desire to be baptised in water was the evidence of that.
God knew the good intentions of his heart.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#421216 Feb 9, 2013
marge wrote:
<quoted text>
Because God drew Paul to believe in Jesus as his Lord, that means Paul believed Jesus paid the price for his sins.
The question was:
Exactly what about this verse

Acts 22:16
And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.’

would lead one to believe that Paul's sins were forgiven before his baptism?
truth

Perth, Australia

#421217 Feb 9, 2013
evangelise..did you say that
e=5 v=22 because satan want split every words and everything see result

Gal 5;22
when i say law your law is not my law..not at all.
''love''=what you see in your heart
we pray u rane svoje sakrij me
we pray u srce svoje sakrij me da tvoja ljutnja prodje
doklen ce se ljutit na mene..
LTM

Marathon, Canada

#421218 Feb 9, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
When Jesus was here on earth he had the power to save. Therefore the thief on the cross isn't the best example to base your personal salvation. Additionally, I on' think you have evidence to prove that the theif had not been been baptized. John had been baptizing for a while, right? Plus, the new law ha not yet gone into effect when the theif was take to Paradise. The new *will* did not go into effet until Jesus' death, right? Isn't that how will's work? Therefore the thief was still under the Law of Moses.
You still didn't tell me where the Bible says Baptism is a work.
You are right the man was under the law, John was baptised in his mothers womb when Mary went to see her. He was not baptised with water , but the Holy Spirit.

Baptismal regeneration is the belief that a person must be baptized in order to be saved. baptism is an important step of obedience for a Christian, but we adamantly reject baptism as being required for salvation. We strongly believe that each and every Christian should be water baptized by immersion. Baptism illustrates a believer’s identification with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Romans 6:3-4 declares,“Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” The action of being immersed in the water illustrates dying and being buried with Christ. The action of coming out of the water pictures Christ’s resurrection.

Requiring anything in addition to faith in Jesus Christ for salvation is a works-based salvation. To add anything to the gospel is to say that Jesus' death on the cross was not sufficient to purchase our salvation. To say we must be baptized in order to be saved is to say we must add our own good works and obedience to Christ's death in order to make it sufficient for salvation. Jesus' death alone paid for our sins (Romans 5:8; 2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus' payment for our sins is appropriated to our “account” by faith alone (John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8-9). Therefore, baptism is an important step of obedience after salvation but cannot be a requirement for salvation.
gotquestions.ca
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#421219 Feb 9, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
No Strawman bibical.
What is the baptism of/by/with fire?"
John the Baptist came preaching repentance and baptizing in the wilderness of Judea, and he was sent as a herald to announce the arrival of Jesus, the Son of God (Matthew 3:1-12). He announced,“I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire”(Matthew 3:11).
After Jesus had risen from the dead, He instructed His apostles to “…wait for the Promise of the Father which you have heard from Me; for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now”(Acts 1:4-5). This promise was first fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4), and the baptism of the Spirit joins every believer to the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). But what about the baptism with fire?
Some interpret the baptism of fire as referring to the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was sent from heaven.“And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them”(Acts 2:2-3). It is important to note that these were tongues as of fire, not literal fire.
Some believe that the baptism with fire refers to the Holy Spirit’s office as the energizer of the believer’s service, and the purifier of evil within, because of the exhortation “Do not quench the Spirit” found in 1Thessalonians 5:19. The command to the believer is to not put out the Spirit’s fire by suppressing His ministry.
A third and more likely interpretation is that the baptism of fire refers to judgment. In all four Gospel passages mentioned above, Mark and John speak of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, but only Matthew and Luke mention the baptism with fire. The immediate context of Matthew and Luke is judgment (Matthew 3:7-12; Luke 3: 7-17). The context of Mark and John is not (Mark 1:1-8; John 1:29-34). We know that the Lord Jesus is coming in flaming fire to judge those who do not know God (2 Thessalonians 1:3-10; John 5:21-23; Revelation 20:11-15), but praise be to God that He will save all that will come and put their trust in Him (John 3:16)!
The apostles were baptized in a manner unlike the "one" baptism Paul speaks of in Eph. 4. It should be obvious that after the tongues as of fire came down upon them they could do things that you and I could not do after our baptism. They were the foundation and they needed to be able to work wonders to prove their message was from God so people would believe what they said. Today we have the Word which should be sufficient. Remember they "put away childish things" (i.e. miracle working).
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#421220 Feb 9, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
When we ask Jesus into our heats the Holy Spirit ,(comes to live in the Believers heart.) you will see a great change in a person who is born again. Their love for Christ will not allow them to continue in their sinful life. The fruits of the Holy Spirit , love, joy, peace, etc. there are nine
Some people are Baptized with the Holy Spirit before their Baptism in water some aren't
The Baptism of the Holy Spirit , is when the Holy Spirit impowers the believer with Gifts to Teach , Preach, Heal, etc. there are also nine .
Jesus met Saul on the road to Damascus, His name was changed to Paul.
Yeah Of course his sins were forgiven did he not call Jesus Lord ??
The events that happened on the road to Damascus relate not only to the Apostle Paul, whose dramatic conversion occurred there, but they also provide a clear picture of the conversion of all people. While some have an extraordinarily dramatic conversion known as a “Damascus Road experience,” the conversion of all believers follows a similar pattern of Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus, described in Paul’s own words in Acts 9:1-9, Acts 22:6-11, Acts 26:9-20.
Putting the three accounts together, the details of this amazing experience come together. Paul, whose name at that time was Saul, was on his way to Damascus with a letter from the high priest of the Temple in Jerusalem giving him authority to arrest any who belonged to “the Way,” meaning those who followed Christ. So intent was he on “opposing the name of Jesus of Nazareth”(Acts 26:9) that in “raging fury,” he breathed “threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord.” Here was a man who truly hated Christ and all who were associated with Him.
Suddenly a bright light shone on Saul, causing his entire party to fall to the ground. Then Jesus spoke to Saul, asking him “why are you persecuting me?” in a voice understood only by him. Saul recognized that this was a deity of some sort because he called Him “Lord” and asked who He was. When Jesus identified Himself as the very One Saul had been persecuting, one can only imagine the terror that filled Saul’s heart. Saul was speechless, no doubt thinking to himself,“I’m a dead man.” The Acts 22 version of the story indicates that Saul’s response was to ask what Jesus wanted him to do. The Acts 9 and Acts 22 retellings of the story have Saul saying Jesus told him to rise and go to Damascus where he would be told what to do.
Please hold back on the long posts. Explain your FIRST sentance. Show me the scripture that tells me exactly what you are saying in your first sentance.
Guest

Poplar Bluff, MO

#421221 Feb 9, 2013
Mark 4

Parable of the Sower Explained

13And he said unto them, Know you not this parable? and how then will you know all parables?

14The sower sows the word.

15And these are they by the wayside, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan comes immediately, and takes away the word that was sown in their hearts.

16And these are they likewise who are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness;

17And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution arises for the word's sake, immediately they are offended.

18And these are they who are sown among thorns; such as hear the word,
..........
19And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.
..........

20And these are they who are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some a hundred.
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#421222 Feb 9, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
actually, you need to study some Church history. And lose the conspiracy Christianity.
The Council of Trent was needed to clarify many rumors that the reformers were spreading. One of which is the the canon of Scripture. The books used in the Christian Bible included the 7 from the OT. Luther removed them. He deceived everyone into thinking the Jews never used those books. The fact is, the Jews never had a canon of scripture until AFTER Christianity.
Some sects had more then others. In about 100 AD, the Jews collectively decided on a canon. And this canon did NOT include Tobit, Kings and the other 5 books used by Christians.(precisely why the Jews left them out... to further separate themselves from the growing Christian religion)
In a nut shell, Concerned in Egypt, Luther sided with the Jews of 100 AD instead of The Apostles of 33 AD.
He had no authority to dabble in Scripture re configuration.
The Council of Trent is used by many Ideologue Christians against the Church, because the CC held it to publicly confirm centuries old Christians teachings. you guys point to it and say "see, they just made it up!" lol.
Sorry, again you just make up as you go.

Luther sided with the first 1600 years of Christianity.

The Apocrypha was never considered scripture by the Early Church.

You also now are out and out lying as the council of TRENT did not clarify but CANONIZED Apocrypha books that previously had never been Canonized by any Council previously.

By the way I was confirmed as a Lutheran. The Lutheran Bible never removed them Luther's Bible included them as did my conformation bible and they were considered as in the day of the early church valuable and useful for study in many ways but never considered equal to the other books as the inerrant word of God to be used for teaching Doctrine or Theology you know the study of God.

From http://carm.org/apocrypha-it-scripture
to save time.

Church Fathers

Did the Church fathers recognized the Apocrypha as being Scripture? Roman Catholics strongly appeal to Church history but we don't find a unanimous consensus on the Apocrypha. Jerome (340-420) who translated the Latin Vulgate which is used by the RC church, rejected the Apocrypha since he believed that the Jews recognized and established the proper canon of the Old Testament. Remember, the Christian Church built upon that recognition. Also, Josephus the famous Jewish historian of the First Century never mentioned the Apocrypha as being part of the canon either. In addition, "Early church fathers like Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, and the great Roman Catholic translator Jerome spoke out against the Apocrypha."2 So, we should not conclude that the Church fathers unanimously affirmed the Apocrypha. They didn't.

So Luther shared the same view as the translator of the Latin Vulgate.

He is in good company.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#421223 Feb 9, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
the only reason a person asks to be baptised is because he is a believer and is saved.
Water Baptism is not salvation it is a outward sign of an inward change that can only be caused by the Holy Spirit.
Your friend was saved , his desire to be baptised in water was the evidence of that.
God knew the good intentions of his heart.
Why did Peter instruct the people at Pentecost to be baptised for the remission of sins when they asked what they should do to be saved? You make a strong statement in your second sentance but you do not give the chapter and verse. I give you Acts 2:38. What do you give me?

Does what the ible says matter to your doctorine?
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#421224 Feb 9, 2013
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#421225 Feb 9, 2013
LTM

Marathon, Canada

#421226 Feb 9, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
The apostles were baptized in a manner unlike the "one" baptism Paul speaks of in Eph. 4. It should be obvious that after the tongues as of fire came down upon them they could do things that you and I could not do after our baptism. They were the foundation and they needed to be able to work wonders to prove their message was from God so people would believe what they said. Today we have the Word which should be sufficient. Remember they "put away childish things" (i.e. miracle working).
What is faith Saban Fan , to believe God .
John 14:12 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.

Our faith or lack of it prevents us from doing what the apostles did in the name of Jesus.
People believe that the apostles who were with Jesus were the only ones who had these gifts that is not true.
If people believe that then they have no reason to believe that God answers prayers today either.
cont
LTM

Marathon, Canada

#421227 Feb 9, 2013
Cont
Hebrews 11
King James Version (KJV)
11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.
3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:
10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.
12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.
13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.
16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.
20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.
21 By faith Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff.
22 By faith Joseph, when he died, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel; and gave commandment concerning his bones.
23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months of his parents, because they saw he was a proper child; and they were not afraid of the king's commandment.
24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
26 Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.
cont
LTM

Marathon, Canada

#421228 Feb 9, 2013
27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.
28 Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them.
29 By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned.
30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they were compassed about seven days.
31 By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.
32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:
33 Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions.
34 Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens.
35 Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:
36 And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:
37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
38 (Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
marge

Leesburg, GA

#421229 Feb 9, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
The question was:
Exactly what about this verse
Acts 22:16
And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.’
would lead one to believe that Paul's sins were forgiven before his baptism?
Because water baptism is a picture of Holy Spirit Baptism, a teaching tool about a new birth in Christ Jesus, by getting water baptized Paul was showing he believed in and received Jesus as his Saviour.
truth

Perth, Australia

#421230 Feb 9, 2013
for others is foolish preach CROSS
who believe will be save
what i see
they sleep=i walk and talk with that man..o shime is that you..is that you jesus..are you for sure
preserve=you will be with me in paradise

they sleep=i walk i talk i return as alive walking trough earth i wrote to you now
then
where is sini sunce=where is shiny sun

not yet

i say to you CROSS

now
ljutnja=anger
when we pray
your anger
why you angry over me
hide me in wounds of your heart
what you see in your heart
21=around 11.30 i been stub in heart toward 22 in morning up to 4.may..day by day night by night
2.5 months tempted according your law..which i say your law is not my law..
i been in constant prayers
i see i know all that symbols
as well who they are..
now
Did you say hide me in your wounds?

YOU ARE NOT ON PLACE WHICH BELONG TO YOU.
WHO SEEK MY LIFE MUST DIED.
marge

Leesburg, GA

#421231 Feb 9, 2013
2 Peter 1:19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Praise God!
Clay

Denver, CO

#421232 Feb 9, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, again you just make up as you go.
Luther sided with the first 1600 years of Christianity.
The Apocrypha was never considered scripture by the Early Church.
You also now are out and out lying as the council of TRENT did not clarify but CANONIZED Apocrypha books that previously had never been Canonized by any Council previously.
By the way I was confirmed as a Lutheran. The Lutheran Bible never removed them Luther's Bible included them as did my conformation bible and they were considered as in the day of the early church valuable and useful for study in many ways but never considered equal to the other books as the inerrant word of God to be used for teaching Doctrine or Theology you know the study of God.
From http://carm.org/apocrypha-it-scripture
to save time.
Church Fathers
Did the Church fathers recognized the Apocrypha as being Scripture? Roman Catholics strongly appeal to Church history but we don't find a unanimous consensus on the Apocrypha. Jerome (340-420) who translated the Latin Vulgate which is used by the RC church, rejected the Apocrypha since he believed that the Jews recognized and established the proper canon of the Old Testament. Remember, the Christian Church built upon that recognition. Also, Josephus the famous Jewish historian of the First Century never mentioned the Apocrypha as being part of the canon either. In addition, "Early church fathers like Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, and the great Roman Catholic translator Jerome spoke out against the Apocrypha."2 So, we should not conclude that the Church fathers unanimously affirmed the Apocrypha. They didn't.
So Luther shared the same view as the translator of the Latin Vulgate.
He is in good company.
yes I'm already aware of the historical scenario you been taught. Is it factual? Nope.

The Council of Tent did NOT determine CC canon.
Those books were already used as inspired texts.
The Council CLARIFIED Sacred texts.
You think Luther had the authority to determine The New Testament? ha, that's nuts.

Read up on the Dead Sea Scrolls. What did those 'turn of the millennium Jews' have in their possession? The book of Tobit among others.

The official Jewish canon did NOT happen until after Christianity. Luther left that part out when he deceive y'all.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#421233 Feb 9, 2013
231
marge wrote:
2 Peter 1:19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Praise God!
What message to you see in the Scripture quoted that prompted "Praise God"????
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#421234 Feb 9, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't confuse the early Christians with modern day Evangelicals.
The Bible (to them) was the Hebrew books. Not the various letters and memoirs of The Apostles. Those did not yet become part of The Bible.
The Apostles were convinced Christ was coming back in their lifetime. They would never have thought to compile their writings into a Bible.
The Roman Catholic Church decided to do just that in the 4th and 5th century.
Your Man made RCC argument is quite flawed.

If we are to carry your man made logic to its logical conclusion they never would of wrote anything down if they thought Jesus was coming back (second coming) in there life time. But there is no Biblical or early Church evidence to believe that they did believe the second coming was going to happen in their life times.

YOU see unlike you the Apostles Knew the OT inside and out.

They knew Apocalyptic writings sayings when they read or heard them.

You see the NT and the Apostles taught of the Coming of the Lord and the Second coming of the Messsiah.

If you knew the difference you would not make the error you just posted.

They believed the Coming of the Lord was imminent as Jesus taught in Matt 23 and John in Revelation.

AS in the OT the coming of the LORD was God's wrath and Judgement and it came in their generation in 70 AD when Israel was sacked and God allowed the Romans to lay Siege to Jerusalem for 3 !/2 years and when it was finished not one stone of the temple stood on another.

The coming of the Lord and the Second Coming are two different events, back to bible school for Clay.

You would do well to stop spewing your indoctrination brain washed teachings of the RCC now and go study the Bible.

Truth Matters

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.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'That's all he wanted': Spicer, a devout Cathol... 22 hr misleading troller 2
News The pope praised him for providing for his pare... Jul 19 Laredo 3
News Boston cardinal, Jewish leaders have Holocaust ... (Feb '09) Jul 19 Dhimmi Democrat 33
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) Jul 18 Married in 10,571
News Paul Is No Inventor of Christianity, Says Pope (Sep '08) Jul 16 True Christian wi... 77
News Editorial: The Vatican's Failure in the Abuse S... Jul 13 seemoregood 1
News In Defense of Free Speech in the United States (May '15) Jul 11 Muslim lives don_... 6
More from around the web