- Topic
One thing that I do agree with the WMSCOG about is that we are not supposed to worship man made symbols. This may excite them to see that I agree with them however all Christians that I know would and do agree with this. Sorry WMSCOG but being right about one thing does not make you good or righteous.
The Cross is a symbol that was made by man and should never be worshipped however to remove it totally is to in fact remove a symbol of God. This should NEVER happen. Man would view the Cross as an implementation tool of death that was used to kill Jesus. Jesus was killed by man in this manner because he was fulfilling prophesy. If the prophesy said that he would be killed by being shot to death we would probably have guns on top of our churches and as jewelry around our necks. As it is the Cross was made a symbol of the power, wisdom, glory, love, and salvation of God and by God. God sanctified the Cross and who would dare to question God? In Acts 10:10-15 Peter was praying he fell into a trance. He envisioned a sight that looked like a great sheet being lowered to the earth and on it were all sorts of animals that at the current time were viewed as common or unclean. A voice came to him saying kill and eat. His response was no Lord; I have never eaten anything common or unclean. The voice spoke a second time saying,” What God has sanctified do not call common.” When God sanctifies something even something viewed as common, unclean, unwanted, unusable, despicable, or a tool of death we are not to question Him.
Romans 14:14 "There is nothing is unclean in itself; but for the man in who's oppinion it is unclean, for him it is unclean."
The Bible says, "There is nothing is unclean in itself." Where have people gotten the idea that the Cross or a symbol is unclean? Because the WMSCOG said it was! Who do you believe? I'm going with Gods Word on this one!
What is Gods stance on symbols anyway? Let’s look at that.
God ordered many things to be made and placed many symbols around us to remind us of Him and His Glory. In the Old Testament God ordered many “Holy Items” to be made to remind people of Him. Exodus 28:37 Make a plate of the best gold with the words stamped on it, “Holy To The Lord.” Exodus 28:30 says, “And in the bag you are to put the Urim and Thummim, so that they may be on Aaron’s heart wherever he goes in before the Lord.” How about one of the most famous symbols in history? Exodus 25:8 And let them make Me a sanctuary, the Ark. The Israelites also were to place a symbol of the Law on their heads and hands as a sign of the Lord. I believe that this is a shadow of what we do today by wearing a Cross as a sign of who we belong to. It’s a matter of great respect and honor. To remove this symbol would in fact be very disrespectful and highly dishonoring. I will not be any part of that. In everything I do I want to be honoring to God even if it dishonors someone else’s beliefs on the matter. My God know my heart and I look forward to being told, “Well done my faithful servant.”
Need more truth about God and symbols? After a rain storm when the sun comes out you might see one of his greatest symbols ever. I would like to see the WMSCOG try to remove all of the rainbows from our sight!
The Bible is very clear about what the Cross is a reminder of.
I'm sorry, is it? I don't remember the Apostles making crosses for their churches. Or the desciples, for that matter. Or even any Christians at all. In fact it wasn't until most, if not all, of the true Christians had been persecuted and put to death that Crosses were instituded by a people we consider to be the fulfillment of the Beast.
So that makes advocating the Cross pretty iffy.
loocpoc wrote:
What about the pictures of Zhang? Are they not graven images of a false God?
No, they are pictures of a true God. Just like pictures of Jesus at the last supper. They do not belong in the sanctuary, and we do not idolize those pictures in any of the ways idolizing is described.
genny wrote:
That's funny, really. When I was trying to study with a deaconess in person, she eventually told me to stop talking with her and get my information from the church website and other such online places.
Yet, when I try to get information online, I am told to visit the church to study in person.
I think it's just a way to avoid addressing the serious issues. But I am very thankful that you are hear and willing to have a conversation. (I just hope that it turns out to be a two-way conversation where you will listen and not just talk.)
I assume you had the same attitude then that you have now? Which is to prove that it is a cult? That is not condusive to learning. You are posting on a website -dedicated- to attacking the character of the World Mission Society.
I have seen exactly -one- sentance since I came here which says something positive about our group, and it concerns not praying to the cross.
I think its a way to avoid confrontational people who have rejected verses in the bible. Because I have -never- heard a deacon say that in my church. I mean straight up word for word it says "teach them everything I have commanded you" and "follow my example as I follow christ". If your honestly -looking- for reasons to be anything other than a person mirroring the customs of the apostles -as closely as possible-, while also emulating their love and goodwill, I think there is a bigger problem than arguing semantics.
It is a two way conversation. I have been researching everything new to me and I appreciate the knowledge. Independant study, which I do regularly, has revealed nothing persuasive against the WMS.
TL:DR I believe you could truthfully say "I don't agree with you". But I have yet to see proof that the biblical prophecies about Father and Mother were wrong.
Prove that Ahn Sahng Hong was not "about 30" when he got baptized, or that he didn't die of natural causes, or that it wasn't after 37 years, or that he wasn't baptised in the year when isreal regained independance. Or that Mother commited adultery -after- joining the truth… et cetera et cetera for even one of the prophecies we teach through the bible.
You aren't proving that the prophecies are wrong. You are proving that personal life drama happened.
Prove that Jesus didn't use bread and wine, on the first month 14th day at twilight. Prove that the apostles didn't… Do we practice an appointed time that is actually -not- an example of the apostles?
The Bible is very clear about what the Cross is a reminder of.
I'm sorry, is it? I don't remember the Apostles making crosses for their churches. Or the desciples, for that matter. Or even any Christians at all. In fact it wasn't until most, if not all, of the true Christians had been persecuted and put to death that Crosses were instituded by a people we consider to be the fulfillment of the Beast.
So that makes advocating the Cross pretty iffy.
loocpoc wrote:
What about the pictures of Zhang? Are they not graven images of a false God?
No, they are pictures of a true God. Just like pictures of Jesus at the last supper. They do not belong in the sanctuary, and we do not idolize those pictures in any of the ways idolizing is described.
genny wrote:
That's funny, really. When I was trying to study with a deaconess in person, she eventually told me to stop talking with her and get my information from the church website and other such online places.
Yet, when I try to get information online, I am told to visit the church to study in person.
I think it's just a way to avoid addressing the serious issues. But I am very thankful that you are hear and willing to have a conversation. (I just hope that it turns out to be a two-way conversation where you will listen and not just talk.)
I assume you had the same attitude then that you have now? Which is to prove that it is a cult? That is not condusive to learning. You are posting on a website -dedicated- to attacking the character of the World Mission Society.
I have seen exactly -one- sentance since I came here which says something positive about our group, and it concerns not praying to the cross.
I think its a way to avoid confrontational people who have rejected verses in the bible. Because I have -never- heard a deacon say that in my church. I mean straight up word for word it says "teach them everything I have commanded you" and "follow my example as I follow christ". If your honestly -looking- for reasons to be anything other than a person mirroring the customs of the apostles -as closely as possible-, while also emulating their love and goodwill, I think there is a bigger problem than arguing semantics.
It is a two way conversation. I have been researching everything new to me and I appreciate the knowledge. Independant study, which I do regularly, has revealed nothing persuasive against the WMS.
TL:DR I believe you could truthfully say "I don't agree with you". But I have yet to see proof that the biblical prophecies about Father and Mother were wrong.
Prove that Ahn Sahng Hong was not "about 30" when he got baptized, or that he didn't die of natural causes, or that it wasn't after 37 years, or that he wasn't baptised in the year when isreal regained independance. Or that Mother commited adultery -after- joining the truth… et cetera et cetera for even one of the prophecies we teach through the bible.
You aren't proving that the prophecies are wrong. You are proving that personal life drama happened.
Prove that Jesus didn't use bread and wine, on the first month 14th day at twilight. Prove that the apostles didn't… Do we practice an appointed time that is actually -not- an example of the apostles?
Joshua wrote:
Please redo your research and start sharing the truth.
According to the wiki:
"During the first two centuries of Christianity, the cross may have been rare in Christian iconography, as it depicts a purposely painful and gruesome method of public execution and Christians were reluctant to use it."
Even *rare is too generous of a word here. There are in fact zero examples of disciples using the cross.
"The extensive adoption of the cross as Christian iconographic symbol arose from the 4th century."
It actually took 400 years for the cross to become popular, and it was made popular by the people who literally killed and replaced the early Christians.
But I think this is my last post here. I have gathered all the information I need.
—
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't believe what the verses say word for word. Even verses that are repeated twice, in example concerning how the dragon leads the whole word astray, and also concerning how the entire world worships the dragon's beast.
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't emulate the apostles to the utmost of their ability.
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't research history only to bodly proclaim unfounded assumptions.
I have nothing to say, to such people who take the emotional drama of individual members, and then blame the church as a whole.
I have nothing to say, to such people who slander personal lives before the church's founding. There was even slander about Jesus personal life in his time, and rumors remain even today. Regardless of whether or not these things are true, they have no bearing on prophecy, and no bearing on the example set by the apostles.
I will continue to practice my religious freedom, and I will continue to preach in every way thats legal.
Joshua wrote:
Please redo your research and start sharing the truth.
According to the wiki:
"During the first two centuries of Christianity, the cross may have been rare in Christian iconography, as it depicts a purposely painful and gruesome method of public execution and Christians were reluctant to use it."
Even *rare is too generous of a word here. There are in fact zero examples of disciples using the cross.
"The extensive adoption of the cross as Christian iconographic symbol arose from the 4th century."
It actually took 400 years for the cross to become popular, and it was made popular by the people who literally killed and replaced the early Christians.
But I think this is my last post here. I have gathered all the information I need.
—
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't believe what the verses say word for word. Even verses that are repeated twice, in example concerning how the dragon leads the whole word astray, and also concerning how the entire world worships the dragon's beast.
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't emulate the apostles to the utmost of their ability.
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't research history only to bodly proclaim unfounded assumptions.
I have nothing to say, to such people who take the emotional drama of individual members, and then blame the church as a whole.
I have nothing to say, to such people who slander personal lives before the church's founding. There was even slander about Jesus personal life in his time, and rumors remain even today. Regardless of whether or not these things are true, they have no bearing on prophecy, and no bearing on the example set by the apostles.
I will continue to practice my religious freedom, and I will continue to preach in every way thats legal.
WMS brother wrote:
genny wrote:
That's funny, really. When I was trying to study with a deaconess in person, she eventually told me to stop talking with her and get my information from the church website and other such online places.
Yet, when I try to get information online, I am told to visit the church to study in person.
I think it's just a way to avoid addressing the serious issues. But I am very thankful that you are hear and willing to have a conversation. (I just hope that it turns out to be a two-way conversation where you will listen and not just talk.)
I assume you had the same attitude then that you have now? Which is to prove that it is a cult? That is not condusive to learning. You are posting on a website -dedicated- to attacking the character of the World Mission Society.
I have seen exactly -one- sentance since I came here which says something positive about our group, and it concerns not praying to the cross.
I think its a way to avoid confrontational people who have rejected verses in the bible. Because I have -never- heard a deacon say that in my church. I mean straight up word for word it says "teach them everything I have commanded you" and "follow my example as I follow christ". If your honestly -looking- for reasons to be anything other than a person mirroring the customs of the apostles -as closely as possible-, while also emulating their love and goodwill, I think there is a bigger problem than arguing semantics.
It is a two way conversation. I have been researching everything new to me and I appreciate the knowledge. Independant study, which I do regularly, has revealed nothing persuasive against the WMS.
My attitude was to explore the Bible and history to study whether the wmscog proved to be true. However, it turned out this deaconess did not want to do that. She only wanted to teach me wmscog doctrine, but did not want to address and clear up any objections to it, or explore faith and the Bible in general towards the goal of discovering the truth, whatever it may be.
I was expecting a two way study and conversation, but she only wanted a one way lecture.
Now that I've done more studying and research, it has become clear to me that the wmscog is in fact false.
TL:DR I believe you could truthfully say "I don't agree with you". But I have yet to see proof that the biblical prophecies about Father and Mother were wrong.
Prove that Ahn Sahng Hong was not "about 30" when he got baptized, or that he didn't die of natural causes, or that it wasn't after 37 years, or that he wasn't baptised in the year when isreal regained independance. Or that Mother commited adultery -after- joining the truth… et cetera et cetera for even one of the prophecies we teach through the bible.
You aren't proving that the prophecies are wrong. You are proving that personal life drama happened.
Prove that Jesus didn't use bread and wine, on the first month 14th day at twilight. Prove that the apostles didn't… Do we practice an appointed time that is actually -not- an example of the apostles?
You don't seem willing to even consider that 'father and mother' are wrong.
You have pieces of truth, but they don't add up to a conclusion that is true. Let me give you an example…
A friend is unhappy in her marriage and wonders what to do to make things better. Her counselor tells her, these are the facts:
–Your husband doesn't tell you or show you love any more. (True)
–Your husband spends all his time at work and barely speaks to you during the day. (True)
–Your husband works with a beautiful woman. (True)
–One of your coworkers has paid you special attention and appreciates you. (True)
–You do not love your husband any more anyway. (True)
Conclusion–It's ok to have an affair. God would understand.
Would you say that the conclusion is true? Of course not. It is similar with the wmscog. They have some true points, but their conclusions do not add up to truth.
But I think this is my last post here. I have gathered all the information I need.
—
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't believe what the verses say word for word. Even verses that are repeated twice, in example concerning how the dragon leads the whole word astray, and also concerning how the entire world worships the dragon's beast.
Well that is too bad. I had thought you might be different than that deaconess who didn't want a two way conversation.
And I had thought we were looking at what the verses say word for word in the other thread (https://www.examiningthewmscog.com/forum/topic.php?id=228).
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't emulate the apostles to the utmost of their ability.
Do you know me well enough to judge my heart and motivations in that way? I may disagree with the doctrine you believe in, but I have no doubt you sincerely wish to follow God. Watch out how you judge people. (Matt. 7:1-5)
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't research history only to bodly proclaim unfounded assumptions.
We are sharing historical research in another thread (https://www.examiningthewmscog.com/forum/topic.php?id=156). You are not quitting because you are afraid you will find historical research contrary to the wmscog, are you?
I have nothing to say, to such people who take the emotional drama of individual members, and then blame the church as a whole.
Not even when the drama is caused by what the church teaches?
I have nothing to say, to such people who slander personal lives before the church's founding. There was even slander about Jesus personal life in his time, and rumors remain even today. Regardless of whether or not these things are true, they have no bearing on prophecy, and no bearing on the example set by the apostles.
Yes, the lives of Ahn and Zahng before the church certainly are important in whether or not the church preaches truth. You are saying that it doesn't matter if Ahn and Zahng (or even Jesus) were sinners before founding (or joining) the church. It does matter because God does not sin! If these people were sinners, then there are only these options:
1. They were not god(s) until after their baptism. (That's ridiculous.)
2. God sins. (That's ridiculous.)
3. They were not god(s) at all. (Only possible option)
I will continue to practice my religious freedom, and I will continue to preach in every way thats legal.
So will I.
And you know that there are many people who read this without joining the conversation. Your willingness to actually take part in a two way conversation and examination will influence many people who are still deciding about the wmscog. And you may end up helping yourself too.
WMS brother wrote:
genny wrote:
That's funny, really. When I was trying to study with a deaconess in person, she eventually told me to stop talking with her and get my information from the church website and other such online places.
Yet, when I try to get information online, I am told to visit the church to study in person.
I think it's just a way to avoid addressing the serious issues. But I am very thankful that you are hear and willing to have a conversation. (I just hope that it turns out to be a two-way conversation where you will listen and not just talk.)
I assume you had the same attitude then that you have now? Which is to prove that it is a cult? That is not condusive to learning. You are posting on a website -dedicated- to attacking the character of the World Mission Society.
I have seen exactly -one- sentance since I came here which says something positive about our group, and it concerns not praying to the cross.
I think its a way to avoid confrontational people who have rejected verses in the bible. Because I have -never- heard a deacon say that in my church. I mean straight up word for word it says "teach them everything I have commanded you" and "follow my example as I follow christ". If your honestly -looking- for reasons to be anything other than a person mirroring the customs of the apostles -as closely as possible-, while also emulating their love and goodwill, I think there is a bigger problem than arguing semantics.
It is a two way conversation. I have been researching everything new to me and I appreciate the knowledge. Independant study, which I do regularly, has revealed nothing persuasive against the WMS.
My attitude was to explore the Bible and history to study whether the wmscog proved to be true. However, it turned out this deaconess did not want to do that. She only wanted to teach me wmscog doctrine, but did not want to address and clear up any objections to it, or explore faith and the Bible in general towards the goal of discovering the truth, whatever it may be.
I was expecting a two way study and conversation, but she only wanted a one way lecture.
Now that I've done more studying and research, it has become clear to me that the wmscog is in fact false.
TL:DR I believe you could truthfully say "I don't agree with you". But I have yet to see proof that the biblical prophecies about Father and Mother were wrong.
Prove that Ahn Sahng Hong was not "about 30" when he got baptized, or that he didn't die of natural causes, or that it wasn't after 37 years, or that he wasn't baptised in the year when isreal regained independance. Or that Mother commited adultery -after- joining the truth… et cetera et cetera for even one of the prophecies we teach through the bible.
You aren't proving that the prophecies are wrong. You are proving that personal life drama happened.
Prove that Jesus didn't use bread and wine, on the first month 14th day at twilight. Prove that the apostles didn't… Do we practice an appointed time that is actually -not- an example of the apostles?
You don't seem willing to even consider that 'father and mother' are wrong.
You have pieces of truth, but they don't add up to a conclusion that is true. Let me give you an example…
A friend is unhappy in her marriage and wonders what to do to make things better. Her counselor tells her, these are the facts:
–Your husband doesn't tell you or show you love any more. (True)
–Your husband spends all his time at work and barely speaks to you during the day. (True)
–Your husband works with a beautiful woman. (True)
–One of your coworkers has paid you special attention and appreciates you. (True)
–You do not love your husband any more anyway. (True)
Conclusion–It's ok to have an affair. God would understand.
Would you say that the conclusion is true? Of course not. It is similar with the wmscog. They have some true points, but their conclusions do not add up to truth.
But I think this is my last post here. I have gathered all the information I need.
—
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't believe what the verses say word for word. Even verses that are repeated twice, in example concerning how the dragon leads the whole word astray, and also concerning how the entire world worships the dragon's beast.
Well that is too bad. I had thought you might be different than that deaconess who didn't want a two way conversation.
And I had thought we were looking at what the verses say word for word in the other thread (https://www.examiningthewmscog.com/forum/topic.php?id=228).
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't emulate the apostles to the utmost of their ability.
Do you know me well enough to judge my heart and motivations in that way? I may disagree with the doctrine you believe in, but I have no doubt you sincerely wish to follow God. Watch out how you judge people. (Matt. 7:1-5)
I have nothing to say, to such people who don't research history only to bodly proclaim unfounded assumptions.
We are sharing historical research in another thread (https://www.examiningthewmscog.com/forum/topic.php?id=156). You are not quitting because you are afraid you will find historical research contrary to the wmscog, are you?
I have nothing to say, to such people who take the emotional drama of individual members, and then blame the church as a whole.
Not even when the drama is caused by what the church teaches?
I have nothing to say, to such people who slander personal lives before the church's founding. There was even slander about Jesus personal life in his time, and rumors remain even today. Regardless of whether or not these things are true, they have no bearing on prophecy, and no bearing on the example set by the apostles.
Yes, the lives of Ahn and Zahng before the church certainly are important in whether or not the church preaches truth. You are saying that it doesn't matter if Ahn and Zahng (or even Jesus) were sinners before founding (or joining) the church. It does matter because God does not sin! If these people were sinners, then there are only these options:
1. They were not god(s) until after their baptism. (That's ridiculous.)
2. God sins. (That's ridiculous.)
3. They were not god(s) at all. (Only possible option)
I will continue to practice my religious freedom, and I will continue to preach in every way thats legal.
So will I.
And you know that there are many people who read this without joining the conversation. Your willingness to actually take part in a two way conversation and examination will influence many people who are still deciding about the wmscog. And you may end up helping yourself too.
shimon wrote:
That is actually an A and a Z for Ahnsahnghong and Zahng Gil Jah
Except that her name is really Chang Gil Jah. Zhang is some trumped up version of Chang, as a Korean person once explained it to me.
shimon wrote:
That is actually an A and a Z for Ahnsahnghong and Zahng Gil Jah
Except that her name is really Chang Gil Jah. Zhang is some trumped up version of Chang, as a Korean person once explained it to me.
Joshua wrote:
The Apostle Paul wrote, "I will boast on nothing but the Cross. Jesus said, "Take up your Cross and follow me." I want you to think about the idea that you put forth that the Apostles didn't use the Cross. You need to view the Cross from a different perspective.
The cross of Jesus indicates the sacrifice not the object. And clearly Jesus wasn't telling us to bear literal crosses following Jesus around.
Emily wrote:
shimon wrote:
That is actually an A and a Z for Ahnsahnghong and Zahng Gil Jah
Except that her name is really Chang Gil Jah. Zhang is some trumped up version of Chang, as a Korean person once explained it to me.
So the Korean said doesn't make it true. People would notice the discrepency in Korea a lot more where they could read the name for themselves if this were true.
Joshua wrote:
The Apostle Paul wrote, "I will boast on nothing but the Cross. Jesus said, "Take up your Cross and follow me." I want you to think about the idea that you put forth that the Apostles didn't use the Cross. You need to view the Cross from a different perspective.
The cross of Jesus indicates the sacrifice not the object. And clearly Jesus wasn't telling us to bear literal crosses following Jesus around.
Emily wrote:
shimon wrote:
That is actually an A and a Z for Ahnsahnghong and Zahng Gil Jah
Except that her name is really Chang Gil Jah. Zhang is some trumped up version of Chang, as a Korean person once explained it to me.
So the Korean said doesn't make it true. People would notice the discrepency in Korea a lot more where they could read the name for themselves if this were true.
You shall not make for yourself anything in the form of………. Um, a question I've had for a while. Why is it ok to erect a picture of "Jesus" at the Passover with His disciples? Why is it ok to erect a picture of Mother? But not ok to erect the cross?
Someone was telling me that she doesn't bow down, pray, or kiss the cross at all. It's just there to represent her faith. As Elohist, we have the symbol of a butterfly that shows who we are. Ok, ok, people do bow down & such to the cross. But people do the same to trees & yet we have trees planted all over the place. People idolize* so much of the things we have in Zion. We even have an image of God given to us by God. To me, according to that command, it's wrong. Please explain why it isn't.
You shall not make for yourself anything in the form of………. Um, a question I've had for a while. Why is it ok to erect a picture of "Jesus" at the Passover with His disciples? Why is it ok to erect a picture of Mother? But not ok to erect the cross?
Someone was telling me that she doesn't bow down, pray, or kiss the cross at all. It's just there to represent her faith. As Elohist, we have the symbol of a butterfly that shows who we are. Ok, ok, people do bow down & such to the cross. But people do the same to trees & yet we have trees planted all over the place. People idolize* so much of the things we have in Zion. We even have an image of God given to us by God. To me, according to that command, it's wrong. Please explain why it isn't.
renita.payno wrote:
You shall not make for yourself anything in the form of………. Um, a question I've had for a while. Why is it ok to erect a picture of "Jesus" at the Passover with His disciples? Why is it ok to erect a picture of Mother? But not ok to erect the cross?
Someone was telling me that she doesn't bow down, pray, or kiss the cross at all. It's just there to represent her faith. As Elohist, we have the symbol of a butterfly that shows who we are. Ok, ok, people do bow down & such to the cross. But people do the same to trees & yet we have trees planted all over the place. People idolize* so much of the things we have in Zion. We even have an image of God given to us by God. To me, according to that command, it's wrong. Please explain why it isn't.
If a photo of Mother is placed before Mother it is an Idol. But those photos are from Mother the Cross is from Satan not just as a weapon to kill God. It predates Christianity as an Idol by thousands of years if it did not then people could argue it not being an idol.
renita.payno wrote:
You shall not make for yourself anything in the form of………. Um, a question I've had for a while. Why is it ok to erect a picture of "Jesus" at the Passover with His disciples? Why is it ok to erect a picture of Mother? But not ok to erect the cross?
Someone was telling me that she doesn't bow down, pray, or kiss the cross at all. It's just there to represent her faith. As Elohist, we have the symbol of a butterfly that shows who we are. Ok, ok, people do bow down & such to the cross. But people do the same to trees & yet we have trees planted all over the place. People idolize* so much of the things we have in Zion. We even have an image of God given to us by God. To me, according to that command, it's wrong. Please explain why it isn't.
If a photo of Mother is placed before Mother it is an Idol. But those photos are from Mother the Cross is from Satan not just as a weapon to kill God. It predates Christianity as an Idol by thousands of years if it did not then people could argue it not being an idol.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.