Religion: What is the one true faith?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


Hey! The Protestant Episcopal Church is way ahead of the Church of England in terms of social progress. We're ahead in terms of our treatment of women and gays.

true

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by MrFun


true

But not necessarily for long. The Protestant Episcopal Church may not survive the latest controversy. There are those for both the left wing and the right gunning for our demise. Something I've learned, and I must admit I'm not certain if its truth or propaganda, is that the election of Robertson as bishop of New Hampshire may have been contrived. New Hampshire is a small diocese. Episcopalian bishops are elected, serve a set term, and can not be re-elected. Candidates have to meet certain requirements in terms of age and length of service. Robertson had just moved into the New Hampshire diocese before openly coming out of the closet. He met the requirements to become a bishop and in fact he was the only qualified candidate in the diocese. His move to New Hampshire appears to have been strongly backed by bishop Spong shortly before his retirement, and it now appears that Spong knew about Robinson's oreintation but kept it a secret. Moving Robinson to New Hampshire may have been intended as a strategic move to force the Episcopal Church to elect a gay bishop. The problem is that the Protestant Episcopal Church now appears to be unraveling. Some parishes are voting to join the Roman Catholic Church, others are joining the renegade "Anglican Chuch of the USA" which hopes to displace the Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion.

I think it will be a great tragedy if the church that was literally the "Faith of our Fathers" becomes the fatal victim of a struggle between two polar factions, each of which are under the influence of external forces that falsely claim to reflect the philosophy of those very same founding fathers.

[Elok]

Well, I think I lost my temper in mid-post last time, for which I'm sorry, but what I meant to say was that the Pope's position, in addition to being purely nominal, was based on his inheritance of Peter's role as spiritual guide and leader of the disciples. Our denial of his right is largely due to the fact that he no longer takes the role St. Peter had. Far from being a steady "rock" of the church, the Papacy is inconsistent, has set itself up in a dictatorial fashion contrary to what we think the church ought to be and has been, is continuously coming up with new doctrines with no apparent justification, and, as I said, doesn't really resemble the ancient church in either services (which isn't a big deal, really) or general spirit. With that said, Rome is closer to us than any of the Protestant churches, but they resemble the Church of old to the same extent that America's government resembles the Roman republic it was modelled on. We are all but identical to the Church of the ecumenical councils, so we think it would be pretty silly to call us a "new" religion.
And we are more or less in our own communion, in response to Ben's question. We believe that participation in a non-Orthodox eucharist (with the possible exception of the Copts and maybe the Ethiopians) is essentially an act of self-excommunication, because it implies tacit acceptance of the ideals and beliefs of a heretical church. If I took a Catholic communion, I would have to be re-chrismated as an Orthodox Christian, probably after undergoing the full catechesis to boot. We don't let non-Orthodox participate in ours either.

[Dr Strangelove]

Peter's spiritual heir would have to be someone whose spiritual leadership reflects Peter's historical spiritual leadership. There is nothing written that indicates that there can't be more than one spiritual heir, or that the idea of spiritual heritage really applies to a particular person or persons as opposed to the abstract idea of a greater church united by a common heritage, or that it necessarily applies to the guy in Peter's old seat. Christ said that Peter was the rock on which the church would be based. Peter went out and spread the faith further than any other apostle, reaching the very heart of the Roman empire. Maybe Christ was trying to say: "Look, even though you're going to embarass yourself by deserting me when the chips are down you will recover and go on to create a ministry which literally will be unstoppable." Nothing was said about administrative details.

[Ben Kenobi]

as opposed to the abstract idea of a greater church united by a common heritage,

Dr. Strangelove:

I'm hungry, so I'm going to go for lunch.

In the meantime, I think you've hit on a very important point, the difference between the 'invisible' and visible church.

I think that Pope John Paul reinforces this idea, if I have it correctly, when he traces Apostolic succession as being the succession of the college of bishops, and priests, not merely through one individual priest or bishop. I believe that the pope then would be one of the college, though the most significant member of the college of bishops.

There seem to be two features of Succession, in that it passes on from one bishop to another, but also, that it carries on with it an orthodox faith. Any priest who strays from the teachings, regardless of the origin, would no longer have authority.

Elok:

I'll reply when I get back. Thanks for replying to my question.

[realpolitic]

If the one true faith is JudeoChristian, then maybe the best way to find it is look for the common thread:

Jewdism = The 10 Commandments = Treat each other with decency & respect

Christianity = Love thy bother as thy self

Anoyone who follows these priciples: Jew, Christian, Hindu, Atheist or Moslem is a member of the True Faith.

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Lorizael


Only if you take that quote as literally as possible. The quote should really be hope in things not perceived. We perceive air, though we don't see it. We perceive subatomic particles, though we don't see them. We perceive gravity, though we don't see it.

For all these things there is evidence that indicates that there existence is real even if we cannot see it with our own eyes. Observation and experimentation still shows that these things are there.

And before you think that your sight is so reliable, you should know what seeing is. Photons, generally emitted by the sun or from our own artificial sources, strike atoms, exciting the electrons of those atoms. The electrons, in order to maintain a stable orbit, release photons that correspond to the properties of those atoms and then sink back down to their normal position. These photons - which are both particles and waves at the same time - make contact with our eyes. This produces an electrical signal that travels throughout our brain, is flipped around a good deal, and is then interpreted based upon our knowledge of the universe, our experiences. Then we "see" it. Seeing is believing?

And now to faith. "Faith is hope in things not seen." If a thing is not seen (read: perceived) then it can have one of two sources. The first source is the supernatural, an area above and beyond our natural universe that does not necessarily follow any of the laws we are familiar with. People with faith trust that the supernatural exists.

Or, if a thing does not exist in the physical, detectable universe, then it exists in our mind. If a thing cannot be shown to be real, then it would have to be an artificial construct of our brain. In addition, this thing must be willed into existence by our consciousness, for it cannot have an external source. If it were to have an external source, it would be "seen" and would not be faith-based.

In other words, faith is more accurately described as hope in things greater than ourselves, or hope in things desired. And there is absolutely no way that we can ever tell the difference.

Of course,
I was just making fun of it
by, as you mentiond taking it as literally as possible

Although from a certain standpoint it also camn be seen as truth.
To say "Air is for real" I have to trust into the experiments made by Scientists (of course some of the Experiments are so easy that even someone from outside of the Comunity can do it, for example the Expriment with the Rat [or candle] within the Cheesecover which shows, that there is a certain [although invisible] stuff which causes the rat to breathe and the candle to burn).
But for other things, like Quantum Mechanics Sceience borders to belief. Quantum Mechanics (and Astrophysics) are so complex, that it is very difficult for people outside of these physical fields of study (and more so for people with no academic background) to understand these theories and almost impossible to check them by maing their own experiments (unless of couse you are superrich like Bill Gates and can afford to rent things like Particle Accelerators or Radio Telescopes for sopme time )
All the people can do is trust the Scientists that they interpreted the Observation from their Experiments corectly and of course made no failures in setting up the Experments (from my field of Study, Biology (with a Specialization in Neurbiology), I know how much influence the correct Setup of an Experiment can have on Sucess or failure and how much room there often is for interpreting the Experiments )
Of course, it isn´t true Belief, as Scientists are preying like Hawks over their Colleagues in the same field of Study, trying to find errors in the Experimental setup and of course and there is the method of Peer Review for Publications of Experimental Reslts and Theories.
But it still somehow borders on Belief for ordinary people as they have no chance to check the scientific Theories for themselves.
(and of course one the one hand there are still cases of fraud gouing unetcted for some time, revealing gaps in the scientific system and also often Theories, which seemed to be established get falsified [just look at the cosmological Constant, which was cald by Eimnstein to be the greatest failuire of his life, disapeared rom the scientific world and now is brought back into light again, as if fits to new Observations made ith betr Instruments; here are also Experments a colleague of mine makes with a certain Blood Enzyme which, if he succeeds may topple things which were taken for granted about this Enzyme for everal Decades]).

[Ben Kenobi]

Anoyone who follows these priciples: Jew, Christian, Hindu, Atheist or Moslem is a member of the True Faith.

You got that half right.

They also have to believe in the first and greatest commandment, to love the Lord God with all your strength, heart, soul and mind.

And it's not love your brother, but your neighbor.

Elok

We believe that participation in a non-Orthodox eucharist (with the possible exception of the Copts and maybe the Ethiopians) is essentially an act of self-excommunication, because it implies tacit acceptance of the ideals and beliefs of a heretical church.

So what if I attended a mass, though did not take the bread and the wine, would that not also be tacit acceptance of the teachings of Catholicism?

The Catholics I think have a better reason not to accept the Protestant's communion because of the potential for confusion since we do not believe in the presence of Christ in the eucharist (or at least most Protestant churches do not.)

They have no problem with the acceptance, but rather the confusion because the two are not the same thing. Now, with the Orthodox church are there any theological differences between the two communions?

[Whaleboy]

Religion sucks. Worship Lennon!!

[Ben Kenobi]

Worship Lennon!!

Worship a dead man or a living God?

Tough decision.

[Whaleboy]

Dead man. Its so much easier.

Still, if you must be religious, be Jewish. Theres no actual hell!!

[Ben Kenobi]

Its so much easier.

Well, if you're right, than you can only be wormfood.

The problem with Judaism, is how would you ever get into heaven?

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by elijah
Dead man. Its so much easier.

Still, if you must be religious, be Jewish. Theres no actual hell!!

Same holds true for Buddhism

Just keep on living on and on in this world all the while tryng to become perfect in a certain sense

[Elok]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Nothing was said about administrative details.

Have you ever heard the phrase, "god is in the details"? If you believe in one truth (and if you don't, why would you even be Christian?), there is a right way to do things, and we're called to do things the right way.
I suppose it depends on what you define as the purpose of religion, but it seems to me that to allow the dominion of one man's will over the entire body of the church is a serious infraction, which is what the existence of a Papacy means. Our Ecumenical Patriarch only has the power to call a council, which hasn't been done in over a milennium. That's how it's always been done; in Acts, when they had to decide about whether or not circumcision was required, they got together and discussed it-it wasn't just Peter saying how it was going to be and the rest nodding along. It naturally grew more formal over the years but the spirit remained the same. The papacy is a corrupt tradition.
Also, why do there have to be separate churches? Has anything changed to justify the split of the church into such a ridiculous number of factions? As I have said, we've been doing things the same since before the time of Constantine. While I realize that we live in a time that automatically reviles tradition and permanence, what has really happened in the intervening years that made the old ways wrong? Apostolic succession is more than just a set of hand-me-down titles, it's a record of who has really tried to shoulder the burden carried by our forefathers.
As to Ben's question, think about what the word "communion" really means. It is supposed to be the full participation in the spiritual life of the church. If you do that with heretics it's a sign of approval waaaay beyond just attending the service. Actually that's true of any sacrament, with the important exception of marriage to a non-Orthodox, which is tolerated and possibly even officially recognized, though I'm not sure. I think there's a verification ceremony or some such to make it official with us, though I never checked since I don't plan to get married any time soon.

[Panag]

hi ,

well since we are still here on this planet after 5764 years , the answer is clear , ......

have a nice day

SHANA TOVA

[PLATO]

Christianity.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST


Same holds true for Buddhism

Just keep on living on and on in this world all the while tryng to become perfect in a certain sense

A TOUR OF THE BUDDHIST HELL

�@

The Tibetans and Egyptians aren�ft the only ones with a �eBook of the Dead�f. The Japanese Ojoyoshu (The Essentials of Pure Land Rebirth) is a story about a traveler passing through the next world that makes Dante�fs Inferno look like a walk in the park. It describes six different worlds, ranging from hell to the world of humans to the Pure Land in the west, and was so influential that the famous temple of Byodo-in near Kyoto was modeled on its descriptions of the Great Western Paradise. The Ojoyoshu was written by a monk named Genshin in 985 AD and is based on Chinese Buddhist teachings. Here�fs what you umbrella stealers, meat eaters and pervy school-girl fanciers are in for.
The first hell, known as the �gHell of Retributive Justice�h, is 8000 kilometres below the human world and is a place where people who have destroyed any form of life, or eaten meat are sent. Here, sinners hack at one another with iron claws until there is nothing left of them but bone or are beaten by devils from head to foot with iron bars until they are the consistency of mincemeat. Less severe punishments include being covered in mud and excrement and being stung by millions of insects while being made to eat boiling hot fecal matter. The shortest of the Ojoyoshu�fs hells, it lasts a mere 12,500,000 years.
In the second level, the �gHell of the Black Rope�h, murderers and thieves are lashed with whips of fire and hewed with burning axes. Next time someone steals your umbrella, instead of getting angry, just picture them being eaten by the dog with burning teeth that devours people in this region of hell.
The third hell is reserved for rapists, spouse beaters and people who watch tentacle anime. Although it sounds more than a little unfair, if you have sex with children, your own children will be tortured here while you watch.
Genshin must have been a guy who liked his sake because the fourth hell, or �gHell of Screaming�h has a special section for merchants who watered down the sake that they sold. They are afflicted with 404 diseases and thousands of insects enter their bodies to eat their skin, bones and flesh from the inside.


The fifth level, the �gGreat Hell of Screaming�h is exactly the same except that your suffering will be ten times worse. The people here are guilty of the same crimes as those in the fourth hell, but they have compounded their suffering by lying or deceiving others about their crimes. The next hell is the Hell of Burning, which as the name suggests, involves turning people into human yakitori.
The �gGreat Hell of Burning�h, the �gdeluxe edition�h of the sixth hell. People here are going to get a burning stick up the butt, just like those in the sixth, but the fire is twice as hot and lasts for half of eternity (whatever that means).
The eighth level, or �gGreat Hell of Unlimited Suffering�h is so far down that the fall to its bottom takes 2000 years, an experience not unlike being squashed on the Yamanote Line next to a tooth-sucking ojisan with garlic

breath. Sinners here are burned with unimaginably hot fires, eaten alive, and dropped repeatedly off the top of 80km high mountains. This hell is reserved for poisoners, Buddhist priests who burned altars, people who let others die of thirst when they had water, and children who killed their parents. Careful consideration is also being given to including NHK bull collectors and eikawa owners in this select group.
Oddly, the Ojoyoshu does not mention anything about the living death also known as NOVAna.
�@

http://www3.tky.3web.ne.jp/~edjacob/ojoyoshu.htm

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Elok


Have you ever heard the phrase, "god is in the details"?

Yes. Whcih book of the Bible is it found in?

Also, why do there have to be separate churches?

Beats me.

Has anything changed to justify the split of the church into such a ridiculous number of factions?

People, they did it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't there been times through the ages when various Eastern factions have persecuted each other? I'm thinking particularily of the Coptic and Ethiopean churches which have had at times a view of the basic principles different from the other Orthodox centers.

As I have said, we've been doing things the same since before the time of Constantine. While I realize that we live in a time that automatically reviles tradition and permanence, what has really happened in the intervening years that made the old ways wrong?

Last year we did a series of services using liturgies from different eras in the past, starting with the 5th century AD. The continuity of the service was really quite striking. Reverence for tradition of course doesn't have to prevent one from responding to the times on lives in

Apostolic succession is more than just a set of hand-me-down titles, it's a record of who has really tried to shoulder the burden carried by our forefathers.

I'm not certain that Christ was all that concerned about keeping that kind of record, since after all He seemed to think that He was going to shoulder the burdens.

As to Ben's question, think about what the word "communion" really means. It is supposed to be the full participation in the spiritual life of the church. If you do that with heretics it's a sign of approval waaaay beyond just attending the service.

Well it's been a long time since we held any heresy trials. What is the harm if it is the heretic whio sits through and accepts our services? It's not as if he were asking us to sit through his services is it? Services exist for the sake of the congregant. If a non-believer joins with us for services he may be committing a hypocrisy, but thee is always the chance that he might be moved. If he stayed away the result would certainly be no better would it? You also have to consider that just because a person has gone through the right rituals and is in good standing with the church he might not really be a believer. It happens a lot.

Actually that's true of any sacrament, with the important exception of marriage to a non-Orthodox, which is tolerated and possibly even officially recognized, though I'm not sure. I think there's a verification ceremony or some such to make it official with us, though I never checked since I don't plan to get married any time soon.

Actually Episcopals are permitted to participate in Orthodox services by virtue of an agreement reached recently.

[Drake Tungsten]

Careful consideration is also being given to including NHK bull collectors and eikawa owners in this select group.

[Shi Huangdi]

Jesus said that Peter was the rock upon which he built his Church and that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against it. I guess Elok feels that Jesus is wrong.

[Vince278]

Religion: What is the one true faith?

The one in your heart.

[Ben Kenobi]

Actually Episcopals are permitted to participate in Orthodox services by virtue of an agreement reached recently.

Cool

And I'm going to challenge Elok's statement about the communion differences.

The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches disagree on some matters. Many of the problems have been solved, but some issues still remain. As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, members of the Eastern Orthodox Churches may legally receive Communion in Catholic Churches. However, this question has not been settled universally among the Orthodox Churches, so if you belong to one of these churches, check with your clergy first. Some of the Orthodox Churches are represented in Rome, and it would be more appropriate to celebrate the Eucharist there.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Lincoln


A TOUR OF THE BUDDHIST HELL

�@

The Tibetans and Egyptians aren�ft the only ones with a �eBook of the Dead�f. The Japanese Ojoyoshu (The Essentials of Pure Land Rebirth) is a story about a traveler passing through the next world that makes Dante�fs Inferno look like a walk in the park. It describes six different worlds, ranging from hell to the world of humans to the Pure Land in the west, and was so influential that the famous temple of Byodo-in near Kyoto was modeled on its descriptions of the Great Western Paradise. The Ojoyoshu was written by a monk named Genshin in 985 AD and is based on Chinese Buddhist teachings. Here�fs what you umbrella stealers, meat eaters and pervy school-girl fanciers are in for.
The first hell, known as the �gHell of Retributive Justice�h, is 8000 kilometres below the human world and is a place where people who have destroyed any form of life, or eaten meat are sent. Here, sinners hack at one another with iron claws until there is nothing left of them but bone or are beaten by devils from head to foot with iron bars until they are the consistency of mincemeat. Less severe punishments include being covered in mud and excrement and being stung by millions of insects while being made to eat boiling hot fecal matter. The shortest of the Ojoyoshu�fs hells, it lasts a mere 12,500,000 years.
In the second level, the �gHell of the Black Rope�h, murderers and thieves are lashed with whips of fire and hewed with burning axes. Next time someone steals your umbrella, instead of getting angry, just picture them being eaten by the dog with burning teeth that devours people in this region of hell.
The third hell is reserved for rapists, spouse beaters and people who watch tentacle anime. Although it sounds more than a little unfair, if you have sex with children, your own children will be tortured here while you watch.
Genshin must have been a guy who liked his sake because the fourth hell, or �gHell of Screaming�h has a special section for merchants who watered down the sake that they sold. They are afflicted with 404 diseases and thousands of insects enter their bodies to eat their skin, bones and flesh from the inside.


The fifth level, the �gGreat Hell of Screaming�h is exactly the same except that your suffering will be ten times worse. The people here are guilty of the same crimes as those in the fourth hell, but they have compounded their suffering by lying or deceiving others about their crimes. The next hell is the Hell of Burning, which as the name suggests, involves turning people into human yakitori.
The �gGreat Hell of Burning�h, the �gdeluxe edition�h of the sixth hell. People here are going to get a burning stick up the butt, just like those in the sixth, but the fire is twice as hot and lasts for half of eternity (whatever that means).
The eighth level, or �gGreat Hell of Unlimited Suffering�h is so far down that the fall to its bottom takes 2000 years, an experience not unlike being squashed on the Yamanote Line next to a tooth-sucking ojisan with garlic

breath. Sinners here are burned with unimaginably hot fires, eaten alive, and dropped repeatedly off the top of 80km high mountains. This hell is reserved for poisoners, Buddhist priests who burned altars, people who let others die of thirst when they had water, and children who killed their parents. Careful consideration is also being given to including NHK bull collectors and eikawa owners in this select group.
Oddly, the Ojoyoshu does not mention anything about the living death also known as NOVAna.
�@

http://www3.tky.3web.ne.jp/~edjacob/ojoyoshu.htm

You got me very surprised there.
Never thought that Buddhism has something like Hell.

But on the other Hand in my past I was rather occupid with Zen-Buddhism, not the traditional Buddhism Belief, so I don´t know much Details of it (just as I don´t know much about the many Buddhas which you can pray to)

[Drake Tungsten]

Never thought that Buddhism has something like Hell.

Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism both have pretty elaborate theological systems, which include well-thought out hells. Therevada Buddhism, the most traditional of the schools, does not have a hell to my knowledge. Zen is more similar to Therevada than most other Mahayana sects, which would probably explain why it doesn't have a hell. Or maybe it does, but doesn't stress it much. I really don't know too much about Zen theology.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


But not necessarily for long. The Protestant Episcopal Church may not survive the latest controversy. There are those for both the left wing and the right gunning for our demise. Something I've learned, and I must admit I'm not certain if its truth or propaganda, is that the election of Robertson as bishop of New Hampshire may have been contrived. New Hampshire is a small diocese. Episcopalian bishops are elected, serve a set term, and can not be re-elected. Candidates have to meet certain requirements in terms of age and length of service. Robertson had just moved into the New Hampshire diocese before openly coming out of the closet. He met the requirements to become a bishop and in fact he was the only qualified candidate in the diocese. His move to New Hampshire appears to have been strongly backed by bishop Spong shortly before his retirement, and it now appears that Spong knew about Robinson's oreintation but kept it a secret. Moving Robinson to New Hampshire may have been intended as a strategic move to force the Episcopal Church to elect a gay bishop. The problem is that the Protestant Episcopal Church now appears to be unraveling. Some parishes are voting to join the Roman Catholic Church, others are joining the renegade "Anglican Chuch of the USA" which hopes to displace the Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion.

I think it will be a great tragedy if the church that was literally the "Faith of our Fathers" becomes the fatal victim of a struggle between two polar factions, each of which are under the influence of external forces that falsely claim to reflect the philosophy of those very same founding fathers.

interesting thoughts . . .

[Dis]

I can't help but think Islam is a superior religion.

I don't see christianity and the western world surviving much longer.

Eventually Islam will conquer the whole world. This may take a while though.

Why? because they aren't afraid to break the rules to get what they want.

There is something to be said about a religion born out of warfare and spread by warfare.

It is destined to win out in the end.

I would convert to Islam myself. I think it's a pretty cool religion. But I don't like the restrictions on my lifestyle (alchohol and pork)

[Ben Kenobi]

There is something to be said about a religion born out of warfare and spread by warfare.

"Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy."

Those who sow violence and destrution, will reap the same.

Why? because they aren't afraid to break the rules to get what they want.

"For those who do not gather with me, scatter."

What profit is their in violence, when all your allies divide themselves into factions?

[Elok]

Ngh. Please show me some kind of official statement that says Episcopals are allowed to take our communion. I'm not saying it's impossible, it's just highly improbable. If by "participate" you mean singing along and crossing yourself, we let anybody do that, not just Episcopalians. We aren't Mormons. And yes, Ben, the restriction is on our end. The Catholics regard us as schismatics, but we see them as heretics.
And Strangelove, we never "persecuted" the Copts or Ethiopians to my knowledge. No whippings or burnings or inquisitions. I'm pretty sure they're both within our communion. We permit people to believe what they want; we just don't let them do it in our churches, and make it clear that their beliefs aren't ours.
I'm not arguing against letting people go to services of a different faith-that's fine by us, if not exactly encouraged. We just don't want people partaking of the sacraments of another church. The only services we're forbidden to attend (again, AFAIK) are interfaith services, because we see the modern virtue of spiritual indifference prettied up as "tolerance" as pure ideological poison.
And, Shi.....enough sanctimony, 'kay?

[Drake Tungsten]

Barbarians! I'd condemn you all to an eternity in Shinto hell, if only such a place existed!

[Panag]

Originally posted by Dissident
I can't help but think Islam is a superior religion.

I don't see christianity and the western world surviving much longer.

Eventually Islam will conquer the whole world. This may take a while though.

Why? because they aren't afraid to break the rules to get what they want.

There is something to be said about a religion born out of warfare and spread by warfare.

It is destined to win out in the end.

I would convert to Islam myself. I think it's a pretty cool religion. But I don't like the restrictions on my lifestyle (alchohol and pork)

hi ,

every religion had its high peaks , .....

and its lows , ......

have a nice day