WORD@TheNet Forum

In legal parlance, one who has personal knowledge of an event-that is, with opportunity to use either one of his normal senses, may be called as an ordinary witness. On the hand, one who has no personal knowledge may be called also as a witness to testify in his capacity as an expert witness. For example, a doctor may be called to testify on his expert view of a particular medical event, without personally witnessing such event. These types of witnesses are acceptable in establishing the truth. Considering that the present preachers of the "Word", e.g, Judaism, Catholicism, Christianity, Islam, etc, were not present before Christ departed 2000 years ago, then all them are professing to be "expert" witnesses.   Now, let us test their expertise on the "Word" by citing a simple verse:     " Do for others what you want them to do for you: this is the meaning of the Law of Moses and of the teachings of the prophets” ( Matthew 7:12, TEV...

The "Word" was given various designations in churches. Judaism has Torah, Islam has Qur'an and Christianity has Bible. In Judaism , which talks of a Suffering Servant (Isaiah 52:13-53:12):Is the "Word" complete and free of contamination if the suffering servant (Christ) is not being considered for acceptance despite being the ultimate fulfillment of the "Word"? In Roman Catholicism , which used the name of Christ who taught “Our Father” Prayer or Lord’s Prayer only: Is its use of the "Word" pure or free from contamination when it doctrinally used the name of Christ to teach the “Our Mother” Prayer or Holy Rosary also? One may find above as an invitation for a religious debate, specifically on how the "Word" is being utilized and abused. But if one is looking for a "true" church, is it not necessary to initially identify first the "false" churches? Now, if you have already identified the "false" c...