I wonder why bill thinks he's qualified to speak as to what is or isn't a "false" religion.
That's my view as well for us all I guess. Whatever I believe is true and false religion-wise is just that. It's what I believe, and I don't see how anyone at all can hold up this book or that book written by people who aren't around to say what they meant or why they wrote it, and I can't see how one group or another could prove they had interpreted it literally and exactly how it was intended, so why all the proving back and forth? We can't totally prove there is a God or gods and we aren't going to be able to totally prove there isn't no matter what we believe without quoting from a "holy" book, so why say we can? One man's false is another man's true, and we aren't going to convince anyone otherwise, so why not respectfully discuss what we want to learn about or just chat about without trying to be THE RIGHT ONE? (I was THE VOICE that you hear on tv acting as God for that...booming and all..lol)