Islam and the current Catechism
#21
(07-15-2018, 08:25 PM)yablabo Wrote: Goyim does not figuratively translate to cattle.  These examples show that the belief is that non-Jews are less than the Jews, not that the nomen/name non-Jew, gentile, or goy is a figure for cattle.  If what you are claiming were true, the use of the Hebrew "goi" in reference to Israel would not make sense.

Definition of figuratively
: in a figurative way: such as
a : with a meaning that is metaphorical rather than literal
  • Speaking of panic, I recently ran into (figuratively, not literally) a friend who was ranting about giant "bees" digging holes in his lawn.
  •  —Ron Kujawski
  • Poor small-town America. During the last gasps of this fevered election, pollsters, zealous campaign foot soldiers and reporters are kicking down its doors, figurativelyspeaking …
  •  —Doug Colligan

Dictionary
goy
ɡoi/
noun
informalderogatory
noun: goy; plural noun: goys; plural noun: goyim
  1. a Jewish name for a non-Jew.
Origin
[Image: V0oSzQUKAq0z-66p7dHbvlWW7zF1R6K75ttJXG-S...uta3mQtSdW]
from Hebrew gōy ‘people, nation.’



So it is a derogatory term with a metaphorical sense.  What is the metaphor?  The Talmud, Zohar and other Jewish texts as well as the rabbis and Jewish politicians defined it quite well. 

In general, cattle is a good general metaphor for what they mean, as in "animals only fit to serve their master".

Words can take on different meanings depending on the person who is using them.  Just as the N-word can mean one thing if an old white person says it and something else if a young black person uses it.  


This article by Jewish Professor, Henry Makow Phd., discusses why many Jews were upset by the use of the term "Goy" on the front page of the Huffington Post.  If it only means "nations", then why would they be concerned?

It also demonstrates how they try to hide the fact that it's a derogatory term defined in the vilest ways in their sacred texts.






America's Race War? Jews versus Goyim
August 28, 2017


[Image: Huffpost-SKB-640x480.jpg]


Quote:This Huffington Post, Goy Bye, caption made a lot of Jews 
nervous because it acknowledged 
there indeed is a race war in America
not between Blacks and Whites, but
between Jews (and their minions) vs. Goyim. 
Jews and Gentiles are both in denial. 
The Masonic (Communist) Jewish Conspiracy is real. 
Are the bankers stoking race tensions to scare 
Jews and discredit patriots?  




(How can there be a genuine race war when the leaders of the goyim are Zionists?  Stephen Bannon has said he is not an ethnic nationalist, except when it comes to Jews (Zionism.) Then, this paragon of US nationalism will include preserving ethnic character.)  


by Henry Makow Ph. D. 

The Huffington Post was back-pedalling almost as soon as the "Bye-Goy" headline appeared August 18 in response to Stephen Bannon's banishment from the Trump White House.  

Many Jews "thought it was offensive and played into age-old anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish control," wrote the Jewish Forward.com.

"I love your work, but wish you hadn't gone with this headline," journalist Julia Ioffe wrote.


"Yes, this is disgusting, on so many levels," Joel Berkowitz, founder of the Digital Yiddish Theatre Project responded on Twitter.

The Anti-Defamation League even weighed in. "Not sure your intent, but strikes me as poor taste at best, very offensive at worst," ADL head Jonathan Greenblatt wrote in a tweet.

The headline was removed, replaced instead with the (also provocative) "White Flight." Lydia Polgreen, HuffPo's editor in chief tweeted an an explanation.

"HuffPost splash headlines have always been edgy and playful," she wrote. "Today's splash was intended to be a mashup tribute to Yiddish and Beyoncé. Any other interpretation was completely unintended."

The change to "White Flight" in  fact emphasizes the racial implications of Bannon's dismissal. He is considered responsible for all the dog whistles in the Trump campaign promising to liberate the Gentiles from Masonic Jewish domination. 

"The central base of world political power is right here in America, and it is our corrupt political establishment that is the greatest power behind the efforts at radical globalization and the disenfranchisement of working people," Trump said on the campaign trail.  "Their financial resources are virtually unlimited, their political resources are unlimited, their media resources are unmatched, and most importantly, the depths of their immorality is absolutely unlimited."

By firing Stephen Bannon, and later Seb Gorka, Trump was breaking part of his "Contract with America."  Jews celebrated. But nationalists must consider there will not likely be a race war
because Bannon and Breitbart are all Zionists. 

THE GOYIM

The incident inspired a debate among Jews as to whether the term goyim is actually derogatory.  In an article entitled, Why I Won't Stop using the Term Goy,  Forward Executive Editor Dan Friedman disingenuously argues that the term simply refers to "the nations." 

But "goy" is neither at heart offensive nor has it become offensive through usage. For those Jews who believe that being the Chosen people makes us better than others, it's easy to see how the term could easily slip to insult. 

Friedman's remarks were in response to an earlier, more realistic article by Rebecca Einstein Schorr: Stop Using the Word Goy: You're Empowering White Supremacists 

While the origin of the word is benign, the pejorative overtone of the word goy is not new. Take, for example, the phrase, goyisher kop -- a gentile head. Not a term for any non-Jew, goyishe kop refers to an "idiot." Or the observation that "the goyishe groomsmen were all drunk and bawdy; of course, you'd never see that at a Jewish wedding." The moral implication could not be clearer.

In other words, to say that the word goy historically has not been a slur is simply incorrect. It has long been used by Jews in a negative sense when talking about non-Jews who cannot be trusted and whose values writ large are lacking...


(left, Charlottesville nationalists look as phoney as a $3 bill. This is theatre.) 

Ultimately, however, it is our word. One with a historical use that is neutral, at best, and extremely offensive, at worst. And if we are to be allies with our non-Jewish friends, neighbors, and family members, it is time to eliminate it and other racially and culturally derogatory words from our parlance. Not because, as some have suggested, we want to be "politically-correct," but because it is how we maintain God's demand that we be goy kadosh -- a holy nation.

JEWISH SELF DELUSION

Both Friedman and Schorr's remarks reflect the Jewish state of self-delusion. Jews simply do not realize the true nature of their religious affiliation and the jeopardy it places them in. Most have never read the Talmud which is founded on the principle that non-Jews are animals put on earth to serve Jews. The term "Goyim" refers to these animals i.e. cattle. 

There is an incredible cognitive dissonance taking place when Jews hurl the aspersion "hate" at people who are simply resisting the hatred which is central to one of their most important religious texts, the Talmud. 

The essence of their other central text, the Kabbalah is that Jews channel God's will. They will redefine reality to serve their interests and perversions, and the goyim will be re-engineered and exploited accordingly. This is the true meaning of the New World Order.  The goy establishment has been created and defined by Kabbalah (i.e. Freemasonry.) Many Jews are warm, brilliant and industrious people. But they're not "a holy nation." Their leaders dupe them to champion "the underdog" to undermine their rivals.   

Organized Jewry are the only people who have a licence to hate. They hate anyone who resists their dispensation.  Anyone who wants to be master in his own house is their enemy. They hate Trump because he seems to offer a lifeline for the people they wish to dispossess. 

Ordinary Jews have a choice. Ignore the truth, and hope to benefit, or dissociate themselves from Organized Jewry, as I have done and champion a genuine diversity where various nations, races and religions retain their identity, and are masters of their own domain. 

WEIMERICA

 The goal of Freemasonry is the triumph of Communism.  The Masonic bankers (Soros etc.) are fanning racial tension to discredit the right. We have seen signs of this hoax in Charlottesville where the "Unite the Right" rally was organized by a leftist Jew, Jason Kessler.  The other leaders of alt right seem to be plants as well. An eye witness said Antifa and KKK arrived on the same buses!  Victim, Heather Heyer's mom began her acting career at Sandy Hook. Are these psyops just a way to discredit Trump and nationalists? 

Tom Mysiewicz has an interesting take on Charlottesville: "As for the actual provocateur in Charlottesville, we are now hearing reports that his case is similar to the recent Varnell indictment. That alleged white nationalist/racist supposedly wanted to bomb banks and the Federal Reserve yet the car he drove was not his, he had no driver's license, he was in an adult guardianship, that he was given the car by the FBI who groomed him, that he had been repeatedly institutionalized. (We hear nothing about Fields in the Charlottesville case, likely because his records were sealed under HIPAA, which is likely as you are hearing little or nothing about him.)"

Patriots need to find a way to resist the America's slide into Communist tyranny. I'll give you an example: People should join together to start an agency to fund lawsuits against Internet companies that censor free speech. We need to go after media companies for bias. We need to fund groups like Judicial Watch. We need to fight for freedom, for sanity and for our children's children's future.
---

https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/08/Jews-vs-goyim.html
Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the antichrist. 
The demons of the air together with the Antichrist will perform great wonders  
The Church will be in eclipse

-Our Lady of La Salette


Like Christ, His Bride the Church will undergo its own passion, burial, and resurrection.
-unknown traditional priest

Father Ripperger said that if we are detached from all things, aren't afraid to suffer, and we accept all suffering as the will of God for our sanctity, we have nothing to fear!
Reply
#22
(07-15-2018, 08:23 PM)Paul Wrote:
(07-15-2018, 01:20 PM)cassini Wrote: There is only one God, and He is a Trinity. The Jews may once have worshipped God in their time, but after Churst who revealed God is a Trinity, they refused to accept God the Son, Jesus Christ, as God. So they do not worship God.

So anyone who says God is not a Trinity cannot possibly be speaking of the Christian God? He must be speaking of some other god, rather than being a heretic, denying the Trinity? Anything false said about someone is referring to a different person?

Were Arians worshipping a different Jesus? Do Protestants worship a different god?

Is someone who says Jesus existed, but was only a man, and the Apostles made up everything afterwards, talking about someone else besides the Second Person of the Trinity?

If you insist Pope Francis is the Pope, but I insist he's not, are we talking about two different people?

Jesus is very clear on this matter.

"He wno denies the Son does not have the Father."
"Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father."
"You do not know me or my Father, if you knew me you would know my Father as well."
"Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent."
"Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the Father also loves the one born of Him."
"He that hates me hates my Father also."
"Whoever listens to you listens to Me; whoever rejects you rejects Me; and whoever rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.”

Jesus IS God, to deny Jesus is to deny God. God IS a Trinity, to deny the Trinity is to deny God. Otherwise you call Jesus a liar and we know who the father of such liars is. Anyone who denies Jesus is a liar and an antichrist.
Surréxit Dóminus vere, Alleluia!
[-] The following 2 users Like Dominicus's post:
  • Sacred Heart lover, Some Guy
Reply
#23
(07-15-2018, 05:30 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(07-15-2018, 03:44 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: Congress (most of which are dual Israeli citizens)  


I just did a bit of research. The latest figures I could come up with are from 2013, from a site dedicated to Zionist conspiracy theories. These figures are for the 112th Congress that sat from 3 January 2011 until 3 January 2013. In that Congress there were 13 Senators with Israeli citizenship, for, of course 13%. There were 27 Representatives with dual American /Israeli for just a tad over 6%.

Hardly 'most' in either House.


First of all, thanks for fact checking Jovan!  I always appreciate. Smile


I've spent almost two hours searching for the answer to this question, and the sad fact is that like the number of nukes in Israel (which we the US taxpayers pay for), we are not allowed to know how many there are!

The numbers reported range from what you found to 89%.  Here is a are list of names, but I can't confirm that they are correct.  


Quote:Members of the US government with dual-citizenship to the US and Israel
http://michaelruark.wordpress.com/2012/0...nd-israel/

I did research for this post. Look it up yourself, put in your own work. I also understand that some of this information might be a little dated now; it was originally posted in 2012. But, recently there have been comments which have accused me of doing no research. It said, “Did you just randomly pick a list of Jews? That is a bold face LIE. If the truth is available, why live in a propagandized world. It is not difficult to find the facts. First and foremost, I am a citizen of the United States of America, I love this country, more than any other country. If I defend my nation, by asking is it correct that so many in power should have dual citizenship to Israel and the US, then you sir are brainwashed. I love Israel and I believe totally in the right of Israel to exist and prosper. I also believe in Palestine and the right of the Palestinian people to live in peace on their own land, in their own country. So, drop the accusations to the truth. Just because I don’t want the United States of America to be run by Zionists, or for that matter Israelis, I apologize. Thank you.

Here is my Peace Plan: http://michaelruark.wordpress.com/2013/0...ict-rev-5/

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION [Current] [9]

Jack Lew – Chief of Staff to the President
David Plouffe – Senior Advisor to the President
Danielle Borrin – Associate Director, Office of Public Engagement; Special Assistant to the Vice Preisdent
Gary Gensler – Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Dan Shapiro – Ambassador to Israel
Gene Sperling – Director National Economic Council
Mary Schapiro – Chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission
Steven Simon – Head of Middle East/North Africa Desk at the National Security Council
Eric Lynn – Middle East Policy Advisor

PAST OBAMA ADMINISTRATION [13]

Rahm Emanuel (2009-2010) Chief of Staff to the President
David Axelrod (2009-2011) Senior Advisor to the President
Elena Kagan (2009-2010) Solicitor General of the United States
Peter Orszag (2009-2010) Director of the Office of Management and Budget
Lawrence Summers (’09-’11) Director National Economic Council
Mona Sutphen (2009-2011) Deputy White House Chief of Staff
James B. Steinberg (’09-’11 ) Deputy Secretary of State
Dennis Ross (2009-2011 ) Special Assistant to the President, Senior Director for the Central Region to the Secretary of State
Ronald Klain (2009-2011) Chief of Staff to the Vice President
Jared Bernstein (2009-2011) Chief Economist and Economic Policy Advisor to the Vice President
Susan Sher (2009-2011) Chief of Staff to the First Lady
Lee Feinstein (2009) Campaign Foreign Policy Advisor
Mara Rudman (2009) Foreign Policy Advisor Sources: White House

112 CONGRESS (current)

THE US SENATE [13]

Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Al Franken (D-MN)
Herb Kohl (D-WI)
Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Joseph Lieberman (Independent-CT)
Carl Levin (D-MI)
Bernard Sanders (Independent-VT)
Charles Schumer (D-NY)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)
Michael Bennet (D-CO)

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES [27]

Gary Ackerman (D-NY)
Shelley Berkley (D-NV)
Howard Berman (D-CA)
Eric Cantor (R-VA)
David Cicilline (D-RI)
Stephen Cohen (D-TN)
Susan Davis (D-CA)
Ted Deutch (D-FL)
Eliot Engel (D-NY)
Bob Filner (D-CA)
Barney Frank (D-MA)
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ)
Jane Harman (D-CA)
Steve Israel (D-NY)
Sander Levin (D-MI)
Nita Lowey (D-NY)
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
Jared Polis (D-CO)
Steve Rothman (D-NJ)
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
Allyson Schwartz (D-PA)
Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Brad Sherman (D-CA)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)
Henry Waxman (D-CA)
Anthony Weiner (D-NY)
John Yarmuth (D-KY)

The guy who made that list makes it sound easy to research.

Yet another blogger said they tried calling congressional offices and were told rudely they weren't obligated to give out that information.

The fact is, THEY DON'T HAVE TO DISCLOSE THAT INFORMATION!

Even Freedom of Information Act requests are denied.

What?  That's insane.

How can you take an oath to defend the people of the United States and be a citizen of another country?

What if our country ends up at war with that country?  Whose side will they be on?

What if those congressmen vote to send our boys to war on their behalf?  Iraq anyone?

Ted Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship and Michelle Bachman renounced her Swiss when they took office.

Bernie Sanders was asked by a radio host if he was a dual Israeli citizen and there was an uproar by the ADL etc., accusations it was anti-Semitic, and she was forced to apologize.  Why?  It's a good question that every candidate should be asked.

I listened to an interview with a woman in the State Department who said that most the folks she worked with were dual Israeli citizens, but it's been so long I don't know where to find it now.

Do we have dual citizen Muslims in office?  Chinese?  Russians?  

Do any of you know anything or know how to find out?
Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the antichrist. 
The demons of the air together with the Antichrist will perform great wonders  
The Church will be in eclipse

-Our Lady of La Salette


Like Christ, His Bride the Church will undergo its own passion, burial, and resurrection.
-unknown traditional priest

Father Ripperger said that if we are detached from all things, aren't afraid to suffer, and we accept all suffering as the will of God for our sanctity, we have nothing to fear!
Reply
#24
The Catechism is pretty weak when it comes to other religions. Considering that the holocaust was profoundly burned into the memories of the Catechism’s authors (John Paul II, et. al.), it makes sense that the subject would be treated with the utmost tact.

We didn’t need a council. I’m sure it was fun for the bishops to fly from all over the world, get together for a series of high-profile meetings, and talk about profound things after the world had just been shaken by the two deadliest wars the world had ever seen. There was no wrong addressed though, and there were plenty of enemies of the Faith who would use the excitement to defend false claims about the new nature of God and of the Church.

A Catechism could have been useful, had it simply stuck with Aquinas. While the Summa is quite difficult to grasp, the Catechism isn’t exactly coffee table reading. Anyone who can handle the Catechism can handle the Summa, and there are simplified versions of the Summa for those who need it. The Catechism is a bunch of flowery language that contains some profound thought, but mixes in foreign approaches to the Faith that tempt those with itching ears and confuse the simple. In these times of confusion and deceit, we absolutely did not need that.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Credidi Propter's post:
  • JacafamalaRedux
Reply
#25
(07-15-2018, 11:10 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: I'm not a fan of the current Catechism's statement that Muslims worship the same God as Christians.

Anyone else on this?  And do you use the current Catechism?

Is this another incremental erosion on the way to One World Order or Masonry?

No, I don't think they worship the same God, because without Christ they can't know God. So how can they worship a God they don't even know? BTW, the Baltimore Catechism is straight up and good enough for me.

Matthew 11:

[27] All things are delivered to me by my Father. And no one knoweth the Son, but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him. 
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
[-] The following 1 user Likes JacafamalaRedux's post:
  • Sacred Heart lover
Reply
#26
(07-16-2018, 06:04 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote: The Catechism is pretty weak when it comes to other religions. Considering that the holocaust was profoundly burned into the memories of the Catechism’s authors (John Paul II, et. al.), it makes sense that the subject would be treated with the utmost tact.

We didn’t need a council. I’m sure it was fun for the bishops to fly from all over the world, get together for a series of high-profile meetings, and talk about profound things after the world had just been shaken by the two deadliest wars the world had ever seen. There was no wrong addressed though, and there were plenty of enemies of the Faith who would use the excitement to defend false claims about the new nature of God and of the Church.

A Catechism could have been useful, had it simply stuck with Aquinas. While the Summa is quite difficult to grasp, the Catechism isn’t exactly coffee table reading. Anyone who can handle the Catechism can handle the Summa, and there are simplified versions of the Summa for those who need it. The Catechism is a bunch of flowery language that contains some profound thought, but mixes in foreign approaches to the Faith that tempt those with itching ears and confuse the simple. In these times of confusion and deceit, we absolutely did not need that.
There's always the Aquinas Catechism.
Surréxit Dóminus vere, Alleluia!
Reply
#27
(07-15-2018, 11:10 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: I'm not a fan of the current Catechism's statement that Muslims worship the same God as Christians.

Anyone else on this?  And do you use the current Catechism?

Is this another incremental erosion on the way to One World Order or Masonry?

“The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her" - Pope Gregory XVI - Summo Jugiter Studio, May 27, 1832

"Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. (1 John 2:23)

Muhammad said that God had no Son (Koran, Surah XIX, “Mary”),

"To believe that Allah Ta'ala is One. That He has no partner, no father, mother, wife and so has no son or daughter; and that there is nothing else that is worthy of praise, or worship except Him -Alone and to equally testify that Muhammed (S.A.W.) is His servant and messenger.

 "Those who say: 'The Lord of Mercy has begotten a son,' preach a monstrous falsehood, at which the very heavens might crack, the earth break asunder, and the mountains crumble to dust. That they should ascribe a son to the Merciful, when it does not become the Lord of Mercy to beget one!" -
- Surah 19:88 of the Quran

Even if some statements from Catholic leaders here and there in the past implied such a thing, In my opinion, to put officially in a teaching Catechism like what the New Vatican II Catechism states is reprehensible.  Even if by some distinction, can be materially true, it is gravely misleading to its readers.

The Baltimore Catechism (No. 3) states as follows:

Q. 1148. How do we offer God false worship?

A. We offer God false worship by rejecting the religion He has instituted and following one pleasing to ourselves, with a form of worship He has never authorized, approved or sanctioned.

Islam clearly comes under the notion of false worship that (objectively speaking) is not render to God.

The psalmist tells us that  "All the Gods of the Gentiles are Devils" (Psalm 96:5) and hence to whom do they render their worship? The Scriptures tell us clearly " They provoked him by strange gods, and stirred him up to anger, with their abominations.  They sacrificed to devils and not to God: to gods whom they knew not: that were newly come up, whom their fathers worshipped not. "  (Deut 32:16- 17 Cf. also Baruch 4:7)

They "sacrificed to devils and not to God" - regardless of whether or not they might have believed they were rendering homage to the True God, the reality is quite the contrary! It is an erroneous proposition to qualify a prayer addressed to the devil as authentic prayer.

http://catholicapologetics.info/apologet...orship.htm

Where do we ever hear about false worship anymore from the New Clergy?

St. Augustine: "Heretics worship a God who is a liar, and a Christ who is a liar." (Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graca, Fr. J. P. Migne, Paris: 1866, 42:207). 

Tertullian: "Heretics do not have the same God, the same Christ as Catholics." (Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graca, Fr. J. P. Migne, Paris: 1866, 1:1216). And "He who does not believe according to the Tradition of the Catholic Church is an unbeliever." (St. John Damascene, Father and Doctor of the Church). 

If, as some Fathers posited, even heretics worship not the true Christ, the true God, how much more than would the Muslims fit this bill?  Belloc did call Islam a Christian heresy. 

Perhaps the God of Vatican II is the same God of Islam, though, who knows.
[-] The following 2 users Like BC's post:
  • Sacred Heart lover, Some Guy
Reply
#28
I don't have a problem that Muslims worship the same God. 
It is that their understanding of who this God is is defective.
Reply
#29
(07-16-2018, 10:53 AM)Poche Wrote: I don't have a problem that Muslims worship the same God. 
It is that their understanding of who this God is is defective.

How can you worship someone when you don't have the slightest idea of who they are? Or if you are In fact denying essential aspects of their personality? 

The only thing "Allah" has in common with God is the name. Even the early Jews had some very dim knowledge of the trinity. Now Jesus comes and proclaims that He is God and the "Jews" and Muslims reject Him and call Him a liar. They are in the same position as the pharisees whom Jesus said "you do not know me neither do you know my Father".

Its impossible to worship the Father without also worshiping the Son.
Surréxit Dóminus vere, Alleluia!
[-] The following 1 user Likes Dominicus's post:
  • Some Guy
Reply
#30
(07-16-2018, 11:44 AM)Dominicus Wrote:
(07-16-2018, 10:53 AM)Poche Wrote: I don't have a problem that Muslims worship the same God. 
It is that their understanding of who this God is is defective.

How can you worship someone when you don't have the slightest idea of who they are? Or if you are In fact denying essential aspects of their personality? 

The only thing "Allah" has in common with God is the name. Even the early Jews had some very dim knowledge of the trinity. Now Jesus comes and proclaims that He is God and the "Jews" and Muslims reject Him and call Him a liar. They are in the same position as the pharisees whom Jesus said "you do not know me neither do you know my Father".

Its impossible to worship the Father without also worshiping the Son.

The Holy Trinity is a mystery. I admit to not understanding it beyond what has been revealed.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)