Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
InterReligious Dialogue
 Whyislam.org Forums : General : InterReligious Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: A Simple Question Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 8 Next >>
Author Message
amoxoxoma  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 2123
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote amoxoxoma Replybullet Posted: 21 April 2008 at 4:02am
Originally posted by Traveller

 
You said so it's impossible to explain how God is one and yet three. That makes it irrational. And in order to believe in the christians doctrine, one has to be irrational. Is that how God expect of us?
 
 
What is unexplainable is not necessarily irrational. Because I (or you)cannot explain how and why God acts they way He acts, and is the way He is, and creates the way He creates, does not mean my belief in God is irrational.
 
There is only one God, "in him we live, and move, and have our being."  This faith is suprarational, not irrational.
The more deeply we are our true selves, the less self is in us.
Meister Eckhart
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
eldon  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Location: United States
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 312
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote eldon Replybullet Posted: 21 April 2008 at 8:34am
Originally posted by Damo808

 
 
 
Eldon... you continue to use the limited few verses which suit your argument while leaving out the many many others which completely contradict it.
 
Damo, there aren't any verses that completely contradict Jesus when he called the Father the only true God, my God and your God. The fact is that his later disciples chose to teach a "co-equal trinity" which contradicts those two very specific statements of his.
 
Jesus in relating to the Father was relating to him from a human perspective having "emptied himself" and taken the form of a servant. Jesus was with humanity for but a blink of an eye in the grand scale of things.
 
But AFTER Jesus completed his mission, AFTER the crucifixion when he appeared to his disciples, THEN he told them via Mary, I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.
 
That is how he defined the relationship between him and God, and that is how he expected humanity to understand the relationship between him and God.
 
Instead, Christianity adopted the Son and Holy Spirit as their God, along with the only true God.
 
 
This is why it was more important to relate to people the way He did, as Philippians 2, 5-9, makes clear people just wouldn't be able to grasp equality with God.
 
"He thought not equality with God a thing to be grasped at", so why should any follower of his think to grasp at equality with God for him?
 
... especially those who accept the fact that Jesus used the term ONLY in reference to the true God?
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

Islam">Islam
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
eldon  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Location: United States
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 312
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote eldon Replybullet Posted: 21 April 2008 at 9:01am
Originally posted by StoryMing

It seems that the "1 cube = 6 squares" analogy did not particularly help anyone here...?  
 
 
Actually, I gave that one quite a bit of thought.
 
If you were trying to draw an analogy for a union of six "persons in God" that would be a good illustration. However, strangely enough, there is no three sided, three dimensional figure that I'm aware of that illustrates the concept of trinity.
 
(if you join three triangles to make a pyramid, you end up with another triangle at the base for a total of four)
 
If you limit your illustration to two dimensions, an equilateral triangle would suffice: three lines, one triangle. But if one of the "lines" called another "the only true Line" that would sort of spoil your illustration, if you paid any attention to what that line said! 
 
 
 
 
Originally posted by StoryMing

As I said earlier: have you ever looked at quantum physics? (I defy anyone to call that branch of science "rational"!)
 
Yet Quantum physics is acknowledged as highly theoretical. If trinitarianism was only promoted as a theory, that would be different.
 
As it is, many Christians, in accord with the Athanasian Creed, demand that everyone must believe in trinitarianism in order to be saved.
 
That is a theological injustice.
 
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

Islam">Islam
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4266
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 21 April 2008 at 8:22pm
[mis-post
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4266
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 21 April 2008 at 9:16pm
 
 
Eldon... you continue to use the limited few verses which suit your argument while leaving out the many many others which completely contradict it. 
 
Damo, there aren't any verses that completely contradict Jesus when he called the Father the only true God, my God and your God. The fact is that his later disciples chose to teach a "co-equal trinity" which contradicts those two very specific statements of his.
 
 Well as i said earlier there is Philippians 2:5-9, which is in in print in the bible, you will ofcourse claim this is a clumsy translation, and ofcourse you have no choice but to play that card when your argument falters, you've already suggested Jesus was in some way omnipresent in the other thread, an attribute only of God.
 
Jesus in relating to the Father was relating to him from a human perspective having "emptied himself" and taken the form of a servant. Jesus was with humanity for but a blink of an eye in the grand scale of things. 
 
But AFTER Jesus completed his mission, AFTER the crucifixion when he appeared to his disciples, THEN he told them via Mary, I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.
 
That is how he defined the relationship between him and God, and that is how he expected humanity to understand the relationship between him and God.
 
Instead, Christianity adopted the Son and Holy Spirit as their God, along with the only true God.
 
 Who is the Spirit of God in Genesis 1:2. ?
  of Psalms 50.13
  of Issiahs 63;10-11
  Judges 6;34
  Judges 13;25
 
 
[This is why it was more important to relate to people the way He did, as Philippians 2, 5-9, makes clear people just wouldn't be able to grasp equality with God.
 
"He thought not equality with God a thing to be grasped at", so why should any follower of his think to grasp at equality with God for him?
 
... especially those who accept the fact that Jesus used the term ONLY in reference to the true God?
 
 Certainly not at the time did he expect it to be grasped not until the fulfilment of prohpesy in Him, and miracles were done in His name after His assension.
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
katy098  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 228
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote katy098 Replybullet Posted: 22 April 2008 at 1:06am
hamayoun:
"Katy, have you never heard of Parthenogenesis?"

Yes I have. But do you consider this to be the 'rational' explanation of Jesus' birth.

hamayoun:
"I simply cannot fathom that God will throw anyone into hell because that person was told to believe something contrary to his internal nature, and to what he sees with eyes, and hears with his ears.  God cannot be that unjust.  After all, God is our creator and He knows what our brains are capable of encompassing."

There are people including myself who believe in the Trinity, so it isn't something that is impossible to believe. I guess since everything required a rational explanation, you do not believe in miracles.

Traveller:
"
That is not the same argument. A totally different field. We are talking abt ONE God, not what God wills. For whatever He wills, He just say "Be" and it will be.
 
You said so it's impossible to explain how God is one and yet three. That makes it irrational. And in order to believe in the christians doctrine, one has to be irrational. Is that how God expect of us?"

The discussion here is if we can believe in something that can't be explained and proven. The birth of Jesus, even though Mary was a virgin, is not explainable, but Muslims and Christian still believe in it.

I believe in the Trinity and so do other, so I guess you consider us irrational

About the word 'begotten', someone has already explained this, I am not going to repeat.

No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
eldon  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Location: United States
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 312
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote eldon Replybullet Posted: 22 April 2008 at 7:36am
 
 
Damo, there aren't any verses that completely contradict Jesus when he called the Father the only true God, my God and your God. The fact is that his later disciples chose to teach a "co-equal trinity" which contradicts those two very specific statements of his.
 
 Well as i said earlier there is Philippians 2:5-9, which is in in print in the bible, you will ofcourse claim this is a clumsy translation, and ofcourse you have no choice but to play that card when your argument falters, you've already suggested Jesus was in some way omnipresent in the other thread, an attribute only of God.
 
Phillipians 2:5-9 in ANY translation still doesn't contradict " the only true God" of John 17:3
 
And I said I DON'T believe that Jesus is/was omnipresent, I said that the Catholic catechism used John 3:13 to CLAIM Jesus being omnipresent.
 
I DO believe what he said there, that he was somehow present in heaven even while he was speaking here on earth, yet he himself prayed that all his followers could have that same heavenly presence, so that verse is not a proof text for the deity of Christ. 
 
 
 Who is the Spirit of God in Genesis 1:2. ?
  of Psalms 50.13
  of Issiahs 63;10-11
  Judges 6;34
  Judges 13;25
 
Who? as in What is his name?
 
none of those texts supply a name of the Spirit there mentioned.
 
The word translated as spirit is Ruwach in Hebrew and means wind or breath OF God. The texts don't say that the Ruwach IS God.
 
 
 
 
"He thought not equality with God a thing to be grasped at", so why should any follower of his think to grasp at equality with God for him?
 
... especially those who accept the fact that Jesus used the term ONLY in reference to the true God?
 
 Certainly not at the time did he expect it to be grasped not until the fulfilment of prohpesy in Him, and miracles were done in His name after His assension.
 
After the prophecies concerning him were fulfilled, he said that the Father was his God and our God, in John 20:17.
 
The miracles done in his name after he departed the earth were done by Allah's power, just the same as the miracles Jesus did while he was here on earth. 
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

Islam">Islam
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4266
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 22 April 2008 at 11:25pm
Damo, there aren't any verses that completely contradict Jesus when he called the Father the only true God, my God and your God. The fact is that his later disciples chose to teach a "co-equal trinity" which contradicts those two very specific statements of his.
 
 Well as i said earlier there is Philippians 2:5-9, which is in in print in the bible, you will ofcourse claim this is a clumsy translation, and ofcourse you have no choice but to play that card when your argument falters, you've already suggested Jesus was in some way omnipresent in the other thread, an attribute only of God.
 
Phillipians 2:5-9 in ANY translation still doesn't contradict " the only true God" of John 17:3
 
 No... there is no contradiction correct, but you choose to plainly ignore context in which things are said. Christ in the form of flesh was still in humble form, fully man, yet also fully God, " equality with God (the Father) would not be grasped" and at any point if he so willed it could have transformed himself into the figure spoken of in the Apocalypse. Christ spoken of in the passage is evidently more terrifying than any testimony of those who witnessed angels and where afraid, even the reverence even shown to Him by the heavenly hosts make obvious He IS 
 
 
And I said I DON'T believe that Jesus is/was omnipresent, I said that the Catholic catechism used John 3:13 to CLAIM Jesus being omnipresent.
 
  
I DO believe what he said there, that he was somehow present in heaven even while he was speaking here on earth, yet he himself prayed that all his followers could have that same heavenly presence, so that verse is not a proof text for the deity of Christ. 
 
 
 Don't get me wrong i'm not arguing against your bi-location theory, i genuinely believe he was omnipresent. Its made clear in John's gospel 1;48 Nathanael saith to him: Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered, and said to him: Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
 
 Who is the Spirit of God in Genesis 1:2. ?
  of Psalms 50.13
  of Issiahs 63;10-11
  Judges 6;34
  Judges 13;25
 
Who? as in What is his name?
 
none of those texts supply a name of the Spirit there mentioned.
 
The word translated as spirit is Ruwach in Hebrew and means wind or breath OF God. The texts don't say that the Ruwach IS God.
 
 Yes Breath of God... which even the Hebrew's acknowledged was the very Spirit of God, which from their early concept of this Spirit was the very essence of God, a divine power which could enter people of His chosing.
 
i.e Issiah's 44;3 For I will pour out waters upon the thirsty ground, and streams upon the dry land: I will pour out my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thy stock.
 
Joel 2.28 :And it shall come to pass after this, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy: your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions.
 
"He thought not equality with God a thing to be grasped at", so why should any follower of his think to grasp at equality with God for him?
 
... especially those who accept the fact that Jesus used the term ONLY in reference to the true God?
 
 Thats a dumb question... seriously... The very point of mentioning equality was because it was written in retrospect, or else no mention of it at all.. as there would have been no reason.. Its quite simple.
 
 Like for example if i'm talking in retrospect about my local priest, who at the time no-one knew was going to go on and become Pope to everyone's astonishment.
 
 
 From His chosen humbled form. As His equality could not be grasped, was He lying in saying my God when in his flesh form he was as one of us. In all honesty, i believe Jesus was paying huge respect to his Father in saying my God. Taking no form of glory upon himself John 5:41, John 8:50
 
 
 
 Certainly not at the time did he expect it to be grasped not until the fulfilment of prohpesy in Him, and miracles were done in His name after His assension.
 
After the prophecies concerning him were fulfilled, he said that the Father was his God and our God, in John 20:17.
 
 Yet still in the form of the humblest of humans.
 
The miracles done in his name after he departed the earth were done by Allah's power, just the same as the miracles Jesus did while he was here on earth.
 
 Yes God the Truine God. Why the REQUIREMENT of Jesus name in exorcism, healing the sick, raising the dead, making the lame walk , etc etc etc etc ? "In the name of Jesus Christ"- stand and walk, see, hear, live ? Why not in the name of Allah ?
 "Ask anything in My Name and it shall be given" Jesus Christ 
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
amoxoxoma  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 2123
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote amoxoxoma Replybullet Posted: 23 April 2008 at 2:19am
Can you guys stop with all the colors?
 
How about just simple quote and response. I can't tell who is saying what anymore
The more deeply we are our true selves, the less self is in us.
Meister Eckhart
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Squeegie  
Senior Member
Senior Member

Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 969
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Squeegie Replybullet Posted: 23 April 2008 at 8:12am
Originally posted by eldon

"He thought not equality with God a thing to be grasped at", so why should any follower of his think to grasp at equality with God for him?
 
... especially those who accept the fact that Jesus used the term ONLY in reference to the true God?
 



Consider why you don't have to grasp at anything in life. I do not have to grasp at motherhood because I have been a mom for twenty some years now. I don't have to grasp at being a wife because I have been one for that and a couple more years.

Jesus didn't have to grasp at equality with God because he possessed it from eternity past. It was just for those 33 years when he was voluntarily stranded in time just as we are, he was in a subordinate position to his father. During his final days on earth, he made a big deal of what was going to happen upon his return to his father. He was looking forward to the time when he would again share the glory he had with his father in "the beginning".
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
eldon  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Location: United States
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 312
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote eldon Replybullet Posted: 23 April 2008 at 9:42am

Amoxoma, the quote box messes up at times on my computer, quoting everything I say within the quote box of the original poster to whom i'm responding. That is why I responded using different colors, sorry. I'll try to make things clearer.

Squeegie, to me, huparcho (subsisting) in Philippians 2:6, along with 1Corinthians 15:28, is solid evidence that Jesus has always been and always will be subordinate to the Father.

He is not ashamed to call Him Allah (God) anymore than he is ashamed to call those who believe brethren (Hebrews 2:11,12).
 
Damo: Don't get me wrong i'm not arguing against your bi-location theory, i genuinely believe he was omnipresent. Its made clear in John's gospel 1;48 Nathanael saith to him: Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered, and said to him: Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
 
my response: That verse is evidence of Jesus having prophetic insight of Nathanael, which some Christians claim as evidence of Jesus being omniscient (not omnipresent). However, Jesus in Mark 13:32 acknowledges himself as not being omniscient.
 
Damo: Yes Breath of God... which even the Hebrew's acknowledged was the very Spirit of God, which from their early concept of this Spirit was the very essence of God, a divine power which could enter people of His chosing.
 
my response: Yes, no problem. The Spirit is the very essence OF God.
 
Damo: The very point of mentioning equality was because it was written in retrospect, or else no mention of it at all.. as there would have been no reason.. Its quite simple.
 
I believe the point in mentioning equality with God was that it was not to be grasped at, by Jesus or anyone else.
 
Damo: Why the REQUIREMENT of Jesus name in exorcism, healing the sick, raising the dead, making the lame walk , etc etc etc etc ? "In the name of Jesus Christ"- stand and walk, see, hear, live ? Why not in the name of Allah ?
 
my response: The requirement for Jesus' name to be mentioned in the performance of those miracles mentioned in the book of Acts was to verify the message he brought, and to avoid anyone thinking that the disciples were doing those mighty works in their own power.
 
Likewise, Jesus did his own works in the Name of Him who sent him, so as to affirm him being from Allah, and to avoid anyone thinking that he was doing those mighty works in his own power. It was only generations later that Jesus began to be exalted as God Himself, as people forgot or disregarded the words of Jesus as to how he did those works.
 
This very day an ongoing miracle is taking place in the name of Allah as millions if not billions of people bow themselves in prayer saying Bismillah (in the name of Allah). 
 
 
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

Islam">Islam
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4266
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 23 April 2008 at 1:56pm
 Hi Amoxoma appologies for the dogs breakfast in quote's.
 Like Eldon, the quote boxes don't always come out as planned, believe me it would make it a whole lot easier for me also.
 
 
Damo: Don't get me wrong i'm not arguing against your bi-location theory, i genuinely believe he was omnipresent. Its made clear in John's gospel 1;48 Nathanael saith to him: Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered, and said to him: Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
 
Eldon: That verse is evidence of Jesus having prophetic insight of Nathanael, which some Christians claim as evidence of Jesus being omniscient (not omnipresent). However, Jesus in Mark 13:32 acknowledges himself as not being omniscient.
 
 Damo:  Prohetic insight...??  It seems to be a bit of a pointless prophetic vision. Jesus doesn't indicate he seen him through a vision, or dream etc, which usually describes the accounts for other prophetic insights by others. Jesus simply says. "I saw thee"  You imply things which simply are not there. 
 
Damo: Yes Breath of God... which even the Hebrew's acknowledged was the very Spirit of God, which from their early concept of this Spirit was the very essence of God, a divine power which could enter people of His chosing.
 
Eldon: Yes, no problem. The Spirit is the very essence OF God.
 
Damo :Is this Spirit not then the Holy Spirit of God ?
 
Damo: The very point of mentioning equality was because it was written in retrospect, or else no mention of it at all.. as there would have been no reason.. Its quite simple.
 
Eldon : I believe the point in mentioning equality with God was that it was not to be grasped at, by Jesus or anyone else.
 
 Damo : But if equality was not an issue,  not within the mindset of anyone at the time  why mention it at all if it had absolutley no bearing on the situation, a bit odd don't you think ? A bit like throwing a comment regarding the best way to get a soft boiled egg for breakfast into a conversation discussing quantum mechanics...   
 
 
Damo: Why the REQUIREMENT of Jesus name in exorcism, healing the sick, raising the dead, making the lame walk , etc etc etc etc ? "In the name of Jesus Christ"- stand and walk, see, hear, live ? Why not in the name of Allah ?
 
Eldon: The requirement for Jesus' name to be mentioned in the performance of those miracles mentioned in the book of Acts was to verify the message he brought, and to avoid anyone thinking that the disciples were doing those mighty works in their own power.
 
 Damo: I doubt it ..Why would anyone think they were performing the acts by their own power if they had just attributed the mirracles to say the God of Abraham, which would have verified both Jesus and the apostals anyway ?
 
Eldon : Likewise, Jesus did his own works in the Name of Him who sent him, so as to affirm him being from Allah, and to avoid anyone thinking that he was doing those mighty works in his own power. It was only generations later that Jesus began to be exalted as God Himself, as people forgot or disregarded the words of Jesus as to how he did those works.
 
 Damo : Jesus made the dead alive, the lame walk, the blind see, the deaf hear, rebuked demons. All this He did by His own authority.
 
Eldon: This very day an ongoing miracle is taking place in the name of Allah as millions if not billions of people bow themselves in prayer saying Bismillah (in the name of Allah). 
 
Damo : No dis-respect, but in what way does this constitute a mirracle ?
 
 
 
 
 
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
sbananamarie11  
Freshman
Freshman
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Mormon)
Posts: 53
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote sbananamarie11 Replybullet Posted: 23 April 2008 at 11:51pm
I've never been able to understand the idea of 3 being one.  If that were true then since we are made in God's image... shouldn't we be 3 split personalities also? The idea of the Trinity was never introduced until long after Christ's death and is never once mentioned in the bible.

Emperor Constantine on May 20, 325 AD. called for a meeting of his 318 Bishops at Nicea. At this council meeting the Trinity-Theory was made the Official Doctrine of the Catholic Church, later in 381 AD. at the Council of Constantinople the Catholic Church reconfirmed the State Official doctrine of the Trinity, and made it more complete.

Shanna
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Yousef1  
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Location: Antarctica
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 881
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Yousef1 Replybullet Posted: 24 April 2008 at 3:43am

If a person had lived his entire life in an isolated and totally un-inhabited forest, would this person reach the conclusion that:

"My Creator is One" OR would he say "My Creator is T.H.R.E.E in one"???
 

Only the truth comes naturally to human instinct, logic, and intellect.

 

Pure Monotheism is innately recognized within man's natural instinct and it stands out clearly and independently.

 

Pure Monotheism can never be twisted, re-defined, diluted, or stretched in order to accomodate multiple 'god-heads' or multiple divine personas, or multiple characters to be sharing together in divinity.
 
Throughout history, The ONE God sent many honorable human Messengers to convey the single consistent truth to the rest of humanity:
 
Noah, Solomn, David, Abraham, Isaac, Ismail, Jacob, Yousef, Aaron, Moses, Jesus, and finally, Muhammad (peace be upon them all); All of these noble human Messengers conveyed one single pure consistent Message:
 

God is ONE and ALONE worthy of worship.  Nothing and Nobody shares in the divinity of the One and Only God.

 
That was the Pure Monotheistic message that was repeatedly addressed to the conscience of mankind, because it's the innate truth that the human instinct naturally recognizes.
 
 
Prophet Jesus was a Muslim; he humbly worshipped HIS Lord, the One & Only God. So follow the true message of Jesus: Worship God ONLY, Not the Prophets, Not "Popes", Not "saints".
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 8 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.