E-mails from Fundies: Scott S. Edition

This good word comes from “Scott” who apparently believes that I’m wasting my life. Which is weird since he apparently doesn’t know a thing about my life.

You really think you’re hilarious, don’t you? What is your point with all this? Did your parents mistreat you or are you just having a bad day? This is what you dedicate your time doing? Seriously?

Jude 1:18 -How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
2 Peter 3:3 – Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

….but you don’t care about that, do you? You’re just out in the world making your own rules, questioning everything God has revealed to you in His Word and rejecting the truth…just like your father, the devil. Go ahead and laugh and laugh until you’re bowing before Him with absolutely nothing to say for your wasted life

Thanks, Scott! I’m sure that when you are asked in that great Judgment Day that the Almighty will be very impressed when you tell him how many e-mail rants you submitted to blogs. Be well, sir.

194 thoughts on “E-mails from Fundies: Scott S. Edition”

      1. I’ll be your butt cushion any day, Redhot.
        (That is, if Mr. Redhot get tired …)

  1. Hmmm. “He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh; he shall have them in sore derision.”

    The Scriptures indicate that God mocks people as well.

    Let’s not forget that fundies mock everyone who isn’t them. It is characteristic of them. When *they* mock others, they are “proclaiming the truth.” When they are mocked it is against Scripture and sinful, especially since their own sins are being pointed out.

    Perhaps fundies need to be reminded of Jesus’ promise, that what is done in secret will be shouted from the rooftops!

    Keep shouting, Darrell!

    1. Oh, you noticed that mocking is proclaiming the truth when they participate in it, but blasphemous when others mock them.
      It makes it far more convenient to act holier than anyone else when your standards are defined in this manner.

  2. Third? 😀

    My favorite part is when he was upset that you “question what God has revealed to you.” Isn’t that what we’re supposed to do, study and meditate so that we know what is truth and what isn’t?

    1. Amusingly enough Jude is VERY specific about your responsiblity to try the spirits whether they be of God. He would know that if he’d read that or been taught well.

    1. I looked up the individual’s facebook account.

      Unless they have been posting for several months just leading up to an epic prank, then this e-mail is legit.

      1. I am supposing that it was his Facebook account to conclude that he was indeed a fundamentalist? Otherwise, I don’t think that one needs to be a fundamentalist to question another’s motives.

        1. He calls Steve Anderson’s new Bible Versions video “the most important video you can watch right now.”

          So I’m thinking fundy to the extreme.

        2. ANY “pastor” who would tell someone to “get the hell outta MY church” because they disagreed with them…. WOW. See, I don’t understand how people can observe something like that and then give credit to ANYTHING that person says.

          I understand everyone says things they regret or states things that come out differently intended and those kinds of things can’t discredit a person. But for a pastor to curse in the pulpit, think because he is the pastor it’s HIS church, and expel someone because they disagree with his politics…. well, 3 strikes works in baseball.

        3. Of course, the pastor is supposed to “get the hell out of” his church. Hell doesn’t belong in a church. But it sure resides in a lot of them!

        4. Norm, I agree. God’s Word is clear about the character of a Christian in general and a pastor in particular: gentleness, patience, and self-control are to characterize them.

          It’s shocking how many of them don’t display those qualities.

        5. The qualifications are listed for Elders and Deacons. The term “Pastor” applied to an office is nowhere to be found anywhere in the New Testament. Neither is clergy or laity distinguished as separated classes of Christians.

          We’ve lifted up mere men as authorities and mediators and wonder why these kind of abuses prevail among us.

          PW is correct in that our servant-leaders must be patiend, gentle and of self-control. Peter also reminded us that these older men who are gifted in areas of leadership (like pastoring, eldering, deaconing) must never lord it over God’s (never his) heritage.

          If we want a man to lord over us like a king or benevolent dictator, then fill the “office.”

  3. SFL has helped me on my journey a whole lot more than my former Fundy pastor ever did.

    1. Me too. This site was the one site where it all started for me. The day the Schapp saga started is when I found this site. I am not sure my hubby is delighted because it opened a HUGE can of worms.

        1. I had a roommate at HAC who was from Kintukkee. Cute kid, cute drawl, but I found out that not everyone fishes with worms. She was dumbfounded that I fished with worms. I don’t remember what she used as bait, just that she couldn’t get over that anybody used worms. To this day that’s one of the best memories I have of my prison sentence, er, college year there.

        2. Lately, I keep hearing about “noodling,” which is fishing for (large) catfish with your own hand as bait.
          Just ask any of the three-fingered guys at the bait shop for instructions on how to do it.

        3. My ex uses worms, fish eggs (roe, usually salmon), bits of bacon, periwinkles, smelly neon marshmallows from the bait shop, ordinary marshmallows, etc etc etc. And flies, spinners, and various flashy attention-getting things. (He’s an expert fly tier.) There’s lots of things besides worms…

      1. Me too! Eventually my husband stopped being afraid of reading it. Can you believe I used to not want to read anything negative because “they” said not to?

  4. Scott has just epitomized why a site like this can exist and have followers.

  5. I’ve heard those verses used way too many times to justify pure stupidity. They were generally used as passports for guilt trips on anyone who disagreed with the MoG.

    1. I want this Bible version! I’ve always wondered 1. whether David actually tallied up the 200 foreskins, and 2. how on earth he presented them to Saul before asking for a bride.

      1. That is, I wondered AFTER I figured out what foreskins were. In my more innocent years, I thought David sliced a circle of skin out of everyone’s forehead.

  6. “…questioning everything God has revealed to you in His Word and rejecting the truth…just like your father, the devil. ”

    Well, if we had not “questioned everything…”, then we would all be mackerel snappers, paying proper homage to the pope in Rome.

    1. Mackerel Snappers, for the Pope in Rome?
      Win-win for me, I love mackerel! 😀 And the present Pope is pretty cool! :mrgreen:
      Okay, let’s find a band to go with that name!

      1. I had a friend once who said there were no derogatory terms for Catholics until I broke out “mackerel snapper”. She was surprised and amused and we spent some time researching the term. Luckily she did not take offense.

        Panda, my Episcopal husband, Stone, is very taken with the new pope. I asked him if he was becoming more Catholic. He said, no, the Catholics were finally becoming more Stone.

        1. As a former IFB deacon (15 years!) and present Episcopalian, I am also quite entranced by the current Pope. He is much better than I ever could have imagined, and I hope he will continue to turn the Catholic hierarchy on their heads!

          I remember a discussion with a deacon at my IFB church. He was talking about how Catholics pray to Mary — and I stopped him. I told him that was a misconception. He looked at me like I was crazy, but he asked why.

          I explained about the doctrine of the Communion of Saints. How the Church believes that those who have “died in Christ” have not “died,” according to Jesus’ promise. “He that liveth and believeth in me shall never die.” In Heaven, they become part of the “great cloud of witnesses” watching us run our race. So they are more aware of us than we are of them.

          The word “pray” means “ask.” When we ask someone for something, we are “praying to” them. We are not shy to ask other believers to present requests to God on our behalf. Why shouldn’t we ask those who are in the Cloud?

          And the “prayers” to Mary and other saints are for them to pray to God on our behalf. Mary isn’t dead. Why shouldn’t we ask her to pray for us, along with our family and friends?

          He was taken aback by the explanation. Later, he said he had talked with a former Catholic who had said I was half right, but that many people really do “pray” to Mary requesting things other than prayer. My response was that just because some people get it wrong doesn’t mean that is what the Church teaches.

          I also noted that we don’t like it when someone says something about us that isn’t right, so we ought to be careful what we say about others.

          I was still in the IFB church at that time. I don’t remember if I was a deacon at that point. But I was aware that I was changing.

        2. rtgmath, if the pope of IFB, JHyles can pray to his mother, its gotta be right…wondering if ole JSchapp is praying to his father in law for an early release from the pokey…”good behavior.” 🙂

        3. If I understand Catholic doctrine right, we can ask for the intercession of anyone who has died in the faith– in other words, ask anyone now in Heaven to pray for us. That would include deceased family members or others in the community who were people of faith while on earth.
          The official Saints are people the Church has certified as being in heaven and able to intercede for the faithful.

        4. I wouldn’t put Hyles in that category because I’m not so sure he is in Heaven.

        5. I understand the Catholic argument about “asking” the saints, but there is still no Scriptural warrant for such a practice and it quickly descends into superstition.

        6. WillD, there is no Scriptural warrant for Sunday School, altar calls, midweek services, Vacation Bible School, driving your car, taking medication, and a whole host of other things.

          And I dare say that Sunday School, altar calls, midweek services and Vacation Bible School have their “superstitious” aspects as well. Or worse.

        7. I tend to agree with you WillD. It tells us in Hebrews (I think) that Jesus is our mediator and our great high priest. He was (or is, or was AND is) man and IS God, so what is the necessity for praying “through” anyone else? Is Jesus incapable of handling all our millions of prayers at once so we need to go to Mary or some of the other saints to get a “clear line”? Nah, I just don’t see it that way. No offense to my Catholic friends (with a capital c, something I learned on here, ha ha!!), but that is my opinion.

        8. rgtmath,
          Thank you for the explanation of Communion of Saints! That is one of the most misunderstood tenets of the Catholic faith and most Catholics I know dont understand it fully. Most Fundies who ask me that question don’t really want an answer they just want to tell me how wrong I am . Im a convert, yes I am a Catholic on purpose :), not a cradle Catholic, and my Fundy friends will only ask a question to argue and never to listen. You explained it so well I should nominate you to teach our Adult Class!

        9. WillD, It is indeed in the Scriptures! “Pray for One Another”. Dont you ask others to pray for you? Who better to ask then a brother or sister who has passsed and is in front of the throne. See Rev 5 for the verse about the saints holding bowls with the prayers of the saints rising to heaven. Where did those prayers come from? Us! Of course they can only pray for us through Christ because they are not all knowing but they are up there cheering us on. Again Scriptural in Thess. I believe.

        10. Not trying to change anyone, just stating what my biblical view is of praying through dead saints (ok, saints who have passed from this life to the next).

          Hebrews 4:14-16 says Jesus is our great High Priest who has entered heaven, therefore, we can come boldly to the throne of grace.

          I Timothy 2:5 says there is one Mediator, Christ Jesus. Not two (Christ and Mary), or more (Christ, Mary, Peter, etc.) ONE.

          Hebrews 7:25 says Jesus lives forever to intercede with God on our behalf. If Jesus is interceding for me, I don’t need anyone else to intercede for me.

          In I Samuel 28 Saul contacted Samuel (which I know everyone will say is different because he contacted him through a medium), but nonetheless, Samuel wasn’t to happy about it. I don’t know why those who have gone on would be any happier about me contacting them than Samuel was about the king Saul contacting him.

          There’s other scriptures for stating my viewpoint, but that’s sufficient for now. And anywhere I used capitals was simply for emphasis in a normal tone of voice, not screaming 🙂 .

    1. That’s because Catholics are not “Bible Only Christians”.

      I want to thank those of you who are NOT Catholic for being so respectful and not passing on the usual myths and lies.

      Hope this falls in the right place. It will look weird if it doesn’t. 😉

      1. Amen ElfDream! Misstatements and twisted ideas are our worst enemies. Thank you for noting the manners of those on here. I have never felt unwelcome for being Catholic and I appreciate being treated like “family” here.

        1. Norm,

          So you never ask anyone to pray for you ever? Your friends, your pastor? Do you ever pray for someone when they request it of you?

          That’s all we’re doing. Asking our friends to pray for us. Some of them just happen to be in heaven.

        2. I do ask fellow believers to agree with me in prayer. I stand by my belief that requesting prayer from those who have passed on is unbiblical. But since interpretation of scripture seems so diverse among folk on here, let me say this.

          If it is structurally sound to request intercession from those who have passed on just as it is structurally sound to request prayer support from those who walk this current life with us, would it not, at the very least, be inconsiderate? They have already run their race and finished their course. And now we would burden them with the concerns of our current life? When you have finished your race and made it to heaven, do you want to have to listen to those on earth?

          My dad went to his eternal reward less than two months ago. I loved my dad so much! He gave of himself to anyone and everyone for 80 years. I can’t fathom asking him to intercede to the Father to comfort the overwhelming grief I feel some days from losing him. Even if I believed God let those who passed on be able to hear us, I wouldn’t want dad to know my grief. That would be extremely selfish of me.

        3. Inconsiderate? No. Not in the least.

          Since they are a part of the “great cloud of witnesses,” they are interested in the race we run.

          Frankly, my grandfather loved me. He wanted to do things for me. I know he prayed for me. And I am sure his prayers still go up in heaven. In the book of Revelation, even the saints in Heaven are seen praying. 5:8, 6:10, 8:3.

          So, why do Baptists and other Protestants act like those who have gone to be with the Lord are “dead” and unaware? That attitude is a vicious rejection of what Jesus Himself said. It is not that He *will* conquer death. He *HAS* already conquered it.

          Your dad in passing did not lose himself or his knowledge and love of you. Going to be with the Lord did not sever feeling the relationships of earth. Remember the story of the rich man and Lazarus? The rich man in hell prayed for his brothers! To Abraham, no less! He was aware of them. And while Abraham could not oblige his request, there was nothing said amiss about his requesting it.

          Your dad no doubt knew your grief. And I am pretty certain he was praying for you, that you would be comforted.

          Again, the dead are not unconscious, not zombies, not unaware. They are vital and active and interested. If you believe Scripture, that is.

        4. Ahhhh, rtg. You try ver’ hard to trick me!!! I heard a IFB preacher once (and everyone will know him) say, “Jesus was NOT, Jesus was NOT, Jesus was NOT, a bartender!!! If you think Jesus changed water into alcoholic beverage you interpret scripture like a Jehovah’s witness”.

          You tried pulling the same thing on me rtg. Your last little line “if you believe scripture, that is”. I DO believe scripture, but I interpret scripture to say at the least we don’t NEED to pray through the saints and at the MOST we should NOT pray through the saints. But you are telling me if I don’t interpret scripture the way YOU interpret scripture, then I don’t BELIEVE scripture. Ver’ nice little mind trick that almost got me!!

        5. Did I do that?

          Sigh. Old habits die hard. You can take the boy out of fundystan but you can’t take the fundy out of the boy (or at least all of it).

          I’m embarrassed.

  7. Darrell, in my opinion, you lead a remarkable life. I, on the other hand, am a model of dissipation and debauchery. I say this as I’m drinking a good IPA.

      1. Cracking open a bottle of Appleton 25 year rum right now. I’m not sure it’s debauchery, but this if this had been the spirit that showed up at the day of Pentecost, maybe the fundies wouldn’t be so uptight about things.

    1. So, I haven’t been beaten up in a couple days and I kind of miss it, hee hee!! But that’s not the reason I post this. I think it’s a legitimate concern.

      I believe drinking alcoholic beverages without drinking to drunkeness is within “Christian liberty”.

      I read I Cor. 8:9 “Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak.”

      If we’re certain that NO ONE on here has ever or ever will struggle with alcohol addiction, carry on. Otherwise, should we keep our “I’m drinkin this or that” comments to ourself?

      That should get me atleast a small buffeting from somebody.

      1. Norm, if nobody on this site ever mentioned anything that might prove a “stumbling block to the weak,” this place–and all places–would be very, very quiet.

      2. By that standard, you really can’t ever drink alcohol at all, nor even talk about it.
        What if someone who struggles with alcoholism sees me coming out of the liquor store? What if that weaker brother or sister sees me drinking a glass of wine in a restaurant? What if a neighbor sees me sitting in my back yard with a beer?

        Either it’s all right in moderation, or it’s not.
        Eating a lot of sugar can kill a person with diabetes. Should no one, then, ever eat sugar? Or at least not talk about it in public?

        1. Big Gary,

          I am highly offended that anyone would drink soft drinks in general, but specifically diet soft-drinks. The aspartame is horrendous to your health.

          Hmmmm……does that make me one of those fringe “conspiracy theorists” in this blog’s opinion?

        2. Stacy, your conspiracy bona-fides are well established, but I have to give credit where credit is due (stopped clocks being right twice a day and all that) – you are (gulp) correct. Aspartame is, in my opinion, probably less healthy than sugar consumed in moderation.

      3. I’m always confused about how to practically live that. I’m going to err on the side of caution, but I don’t understand the mechanism where someone does something they think is wrong because they see me do something I think is right. Like the alcoholic seeing Big Gary talk about enjoying his liquor; is Big Gary enough of a model to that person that his opinion of the propriety of it would be valued? If not, then he wouldn’t follow, if so, maybe he would realize there is some proper usage. Even for the alcoholic, drinking is not a sin. That person just has a track record and proclivity for abusing it to a sinful level.
        The basic question is at what point does that weaker brother need to get his conscience aligned with Scripture so that it doesn’t condemn him for acceptable behavior? Do I wait for the Spirit to do that through some means or do i take that as urging to go be the means for that person?
        Bottom line: if you have a problem with something, don’t do it. If you do it and offend your conscience blame yourself. For my part, I won’t encourage you to offend your conscience.

        1. Yes, asking people to refrain from talking about it or telling them that imbibing is a stumbling block is really a violation of Romans 14.

          You do your thing (or don’t do your thing) and I will do my thing (or not) and we will both respect each other and not look down on the other in regard to disputable matters. If I know you struggle I won’t offer you a beer, since you know I don’t struggle with it then let it be.

        2. In fact, I never offer alcohol to people I know are trying not to drink, and I don’t drink in front of people if I know they are struggling with alcoholism. That’s just my personal version of politeness.

        3. Big Gary, I think you have it right there. To me, being a stumbling block would not be having a glass of wine in a restaurant- it would be offering a glass to someone who I know has a problem with alcohol. Bit of a difference.

      4. Norm, if you are going out to dinner with a friend that you know is struggling with alcoholism, then I think that according to that verse while in that restaurant you should refrain from drinking alcohol. If you were to drink alcohol in front of him, then you might cause a stumbling block to him.

        However, the amount of things that people can have trouble with is immense. Everybody deals with temptations, and they are all different. Almost all of them are things that most people enjoy normally and healthily and wouldn’t realise it could be an issue to others. On a forum like this, where anyone could see, and where we don’t all know each other well personally, it would be impossible to have a conversation.

    2. Norm
      We could say the same thing about Christ. Hasn’t he done enough? He interceeds for us because he loves us and so do they. Their love for us is perfected in the prescence of God. They do not consider it a burden.

        1. George is an unseen entity who haunts these boards putting our posts in the wrong places…or at least not where we intended them to be. I hope this one winds up in the right place!

          Normally he shows up when the comments reach over 100.

  8. Dear Scott,
    Many of us who hang out on this site were, at one time, just like you. We were vigilantes for righteousness, quick to point out what others were doing wrong, and how they were probably going to hell.

    As we aged, we saw that we couldn’t believe in a God if he were as he had been presented to us in fundamentalism. So we took a step back to evaluate. Some of us took several steps back. One day, as you age, you’ll probably have the same doubts. That’s ok. If God is good, he won’t hate you for the steps back. He’s big enough to understand. We have former (and a few current) fundy pastors on this site. I have a BA from the School of Religion at BJU and a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary. Years later, I took steps back to examine what I had learned, to evaluate if it was truth. I’m still evaluating, at 57 years old, nearing retirement from secular employment. If there is indeed a life after death, my salvation is not dependent on the quality of my belief. That is solipsistic. My salvation is dependent on Christ’s death on the cross, for me.

  9. Scott, try to get some rest. Consider this-“A merry heart doeth good like a medicine, but a broken spirit drieth the bones.” Prov. 17:22 (KJV)
    This is a place of healing the spirits that have been broken by the ignorance and intimidation such as you spew forth. If mockery gets your goat, remember the words of St. Thomas Moore: “The devil, that proud spirit, cannot endure to be mocked.”
    Now, *whose* father is the devil here?

    1. Love this!

      Comeback: “God is not mocked” Gal 6:7
      Response: “When did you/your church/your MOg become God?”

  10. That is some strong accusations there. “Your father the devil”. It is quite sad that one has to spew such hate, but I have to remember that is how most IFB operate. The hatred that is spread amongst them is quite out of control. They say they love you, but they have no idea how to love because of the hatred that consumes them. I don’t know of another religion that spews hate like the IFB. It is sickening. There is nothing that Scott has to say that is said in love. I am not sure what would happen to the IFB if they ALL got a real dose of God’s true love.
    Just leave an IFB church and find out how much you are NOT loved.

  11. I just can’t wait to the the Instant Replay of all of this on the Celestial Jumbotron.

    1. Just remember, if Faceless God doesn’t approve, doing a perfect swan dive into the Lake-O’Fire isn’t going to redeem you.

  12. It follows the formula for every fundy letter:

    ~question the person they disagree with’s character
    ~quote Scripture randomly and often out of context with poor hermeneutics
    ~demonize the person they disagree with
    ~promise either eternal hell or a “you’ll get yours at the White Throne judgment”

    1. The “you’ll get yours” attitude…that’s the one that may have driven me the farthest out the door. Sometimes said in sadness, most often said with a little relish, like they’ll be delighted to see all those sinners get eternal comeuppance, delighting in pain and suffering. So very sad.

      Scott failed, however, since he didn’t end with the traditional fundy F-u: “I’ll pray for you.”

      1. The attitude is chilling since it is SO the opposite of Christ.

        Another attitude that got to me, because it’s so depressing and draining, is their constant negative assumptions: they choose the WORST possible interpretation of another person’s actions instead of the best. Why attribute the worst motives instead of believing the best about someone?

        I saw it from their assumptions of why people raised their hands while singing (“to get attention”) to why people attended contemporary services (“because they wanted to excuse their sin”) and it’s seen in this letter too:

        He wrote, “What is your point with all this? Did your parents mistreat you or are you just having a bad day?” No recognition of the fact that people have said they’ve been helped by this site.

        He added, “but you don’t care about that, do you?” He doesn’t know Darrell’s heart; only God does.

        He assumes that Darrell is “questioning everything God has revealed to you in His Word and rejecting the truth.” That’s a huge – and uncharitable – jump to make.

        He ends by saying that Darrell will have “absolutely nothing to say for your wasted life,” yet who is he to make this judgment? Jesus Himself said that the first shall be last and the last first so how can we humans know from an earthly perspective whose lives are being spent with eternal impact and whose are not? Also, the God I believe in said that He would reward even a cup of cold water given in His Name. God doesn’t see as man sees.

        Attitudes like this seem in stark contrast to the fruit of the Spirit.

        1. “Attitudes like this seem in stark contrast to the fruit of the Spirit.”

          They do, don’t they? Hence one of the many reasons SFL exists. We have been driven away by such attitudes.

          The more I learn here, the more I see that the IFB church I came out of was tame by comparison to what many others here have experienced. Still, the same attitudes are there, tolerated and nurtured, while opinions and facts to the contrary are not well tolerated.

      2. yes–most fundies sound like they are relishing the idea of judgment coming on others despite the fact that God says he doesn’t delight in the death of the wicked.

  13. I don’t know how many times we have to say this but believe what you want. Live how you will…just don’t hurt people. Don’t abuse them physically or emotionally or spiritually..,

    But we have seen too many people hurt in too many ways by Fundamentalism and no we’re not talking about someone who was offended or had his or her feelings hurt. We’re talking about honest real ABUSE. Over and over and over. We’re talking about victim blaming. We’re talking about people being made to feel guilty by things that are NOT sins. We are talking about narcissism in the pulpit. These things exist and the sooner they are dealt with…the better. It appears that with a few exceptions most fundamentalists will either deny that these problems exist or blame the person who is brave enough to come forward.

    We are also talking about twisting the Scripture out of context to the point where it is no longer recognizable to anyone who holds to the most basic tenants of Christianity. That is where the ‘crazy’ comes in.

    No not all IFB churches are like this. No they aren’t all a hotbed of cultist activity. The thing is though someone has to pay attention to the ones that ARE.

    Perhaps if these problems were dealt with in an open and honest manner…. sites like this would have no audience.

    1. That first paragraph is perfect! Really all of it is a good view on how to live, but especially that first bit. I agree wholeheartedly!

    2. That was one of the best summations of IFB behaviour that I’ve ever read.

  14. Sounds like somebody’s angry at the person who knocked over their golden calf.

  15. Darrell will be bowing before God? Which of the stringed instruments will he be playing?

    1. I know Scott MEANT God (by the capital H) but grammatically his sentence is saying that Darrell will be bowing before Satan:

      “. . . just like your father, the devil. Go ahead and laugh and laugh until you’re bowing before Him.”

  16. Oy, Darrell, if this blog is the best you can do while “walking after (your) own ungodly lusts,” you need to find some new interests. If you can’t find something more financially rewarding and/or more fun than giving a bunch of ex-fundies and their friends a place to laugh, blow off steam, acknowledge the craziness, and heal their wounds, you’re not trying very hard. All you’re getting out of this place is the thanks of almost everybody who hangs out here.

  17. I think Darrell’s retort hits it perfectly. It’s this false idea that our works will be reviewed and rewards given accordingly. You know what works I will present? You can read about them in the Gospels. I will present the imputed righteousness of Jesus.
    For being hyper-dispensational and professing to be a NT church, these IFB churches sure do focus on lawkeeping a lot. I can’t keep the law, that is well-established. I’m not going to go the law for help, I’m going to the Lord of the law. That way He gets the glory, not me.

    1. I say the same thing, the EXACT same thing. When I stand in front of a Holy God I don’t want to point to ANYTHING I did on this earth, I want to point to Jesus and say I believe He finished the work. Here is my question. Where and how does the statement from Jesus in John 14:15 come into play? If you love me, keep my commands.

      1. Jesus’ commands were simple. “His yoke is easy, his burden light.”

        Love the Lord your God with all your heart….
        Love your neighbor as your self.

      2. Norm, I don’t think Jesus’ words there were law (“thou shalt”) or some kind of spiritual equation (“the necessary and sufficient action encompassing love for me consists in doing my commandments”). I think Jesus was coaching his disciples using normal language; i.e. reminding them that love is not just some kind of feeling coupled to a wonton life, but rather is a verb, consisting in how we choose to live our life. That is my take on it.

      3. Norm, the standard Baptist answer to that is that our salvation is through grace alone through Christ’s death, but if we truly love Christ, we should naturally want to follow his example. I tend to buy into that reasoning, but I’d like to point out Jesus’ language in the rest of John 14. He talks about sending an Advocate, the Holy Spirit, who will come to teach us to do these things. He talks more about love than about obeying commands – the one I love is loved by my Father, and I too love them. He says “I leave my peace with you.” He says don’t be afraid. There’s much more emphasis on all the loving help we’re going to have in obeying these commands, than in the command to obey them. For any fundies reading, if you’re really interested in convincing people to follow Jesus’ commands, there’s the way to go about it.

  18. I too have wondered if “Darrell” (if there really is such a person) was overly abused by his parents.

    The biggest problem with this site is that its dishonest facade fools a lot of people. It’s called a silly little blog dedicated to the funny foibles of the IFB movement. But then when you actually get into it, the blog is a site dedicated to questioning and/or mocking conservatism, the Bible, and Christianity. We would actually have respect for the site if, instead of trying to advertise itself as a site to make light of the odder things of IFB, it was just made clear that the true purpose of the site has not much to do with IFB’s, but is mainly concerned with questioning and making light of all things related to Christianity and conservatism.

    I have no idea if this “Darrell” person even considers himself a Christian or not or what his beliefs are. The site has been totally taken over by the radical left, so their views are the ones that are viewed as representative of the site, whether or not the owner agrees to them or not, since he has no moderation at all. (By the way, I do appreciate that he does allow the occasional Christian or conservative who happens to straggle in here to make comments.)

    1. Stacy, I understand your concern. I read much in here with a “guarded” attitude. But if you are REALLY concerned about the souls of people in here, in my opinion you are going about it the wrong way.

      You are handling it the equivalent of a street preacher screaming at folks that they are going to hell. When someone approaches him, rather than devoting his attention to the one with a question, he looks over him to continue screaming at the crowd.

      One of my favorite verses when I think about reaching people is how Mark 10:21 starts. Jesus looked at him … and loved him. Man, that gives me chills. Jesus looked at him, and he LOVED him. I can just see Jesus look at this man that he knew loved riches more than he wanted to follow Christ. But He looked at him, and I can just see His face soften, a fatherly smile touch His lips, His voice maybe break just a little as His heart ached because He knew this man wasn’t going to turn from all his “things”, but He LOVED him!!

        1. Ok, forgive my ignorance, but I see the term Poe used alot. What is that? And I guess I’ll just have to stick around for the vaccine and chem-trail things.

        2. Norm, “Poe’s Law states:[1]
          ‘Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won’t mistake for the real thing.’ It is an observation that it’s difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish between parodies of fundamentalism or other extreme views and their genuine proponents, since they both seem equally insane.” (from RationalWiki)

      1. Thank you Norm. Well said. I was about to get my dander up again, but I have to realize she is entitled to her opinion.

    2. Hello Stacy. Got your troll costume on today?

      Darrell is indeed a real person. And while I don’t know about him, some of us were indeed abused as children by fundamentalist parents.

      The site is about discussing the foibles of fundamentalism. However, since conservatism and fundamentalism are joined at the hip, it isn’t our fault that conservatism fares badly when it acts like fundamentalists do. Yes, the ungodliness of fundamentalists shows in their politics. Can’t separate it.

      We aren’t mocking Christianity, by the way. Unless, of course, you think nothing that isn’t fundamentalist is Christian. I go to an Episcopal Church. I don’t mock Christianity. I mock the fundamentalist distortion of Christianity.

      As for the Bible, I am not questioning it, either. It is what it is. I do contend, however, that it isn’t what fundamentalists say it is!

      And as for being “taken over by the radical left,” I insist that my being a liberal is due to the excesses, lies, and miserable behavior of fundamentalism. Do I need thank you for being a part of the system that caused me to rethink what I believe, for being a shining example of the attitudes I have elected to reject? It is nice to have such a good bad example!

      Being recognized as a liberal or a “leftist” is no insult, but a great compliment. I am a liberal and a Christian, profoundly grateful I am no longer a fundamentalist.

      1. Here in Alabama, “liberal” is the worst insult you can hurl at someone.

        Nevertheless, I too am both an Episcopalian and a liberal.

        1. Queer lovin’, gun hatin’ Auburn Liberal is the worst insult in Alabama. Get it right….

        2. Hey, I drive a Volvo. And given the bumper stickers on the rear, I suspect that if I attempted to enter Alabama in it, I’d be turned away at the border. 😉

    3. Dear stacymcanderson:

      You wrote: ‘… dishonest facade fools a lot of people. It’s called a silly little blog dedicated to the funny foibles of the IFB movement.But then when you actually get into it, the blog is a site dedicated to questioning and/or mocking conservatism, the Bible, and Christianity.’

      I missed the dishonesty. So far as I know, Darrell has given no reason to doubt his faith commitments. Yes, some who left fundamentalism likewise ceased professing Jesus Christ. Confessed atheists, at least one Muslim, and others have posted here. That Darrell allows them to post is hardly an attack on Christian faith or the Bible. Discussion, doubts and questions do interweave with the ‘fun’ here. Unless your faith is weak, that shouldn’t be a problem. After all, life is no different.

      It seems more likely that the ‘right’ has ‘taken over’ IFB churches than that the ‘left’ has ‘taken over’ this forum. As a revolutionary socialist, I hear ‘left/right’ talk more as a ruling-class ‘inhouse disagreement’ as how best to reduce the working class.

      As I see it, conservatism OUGHT to be questioned. And I believe that radical Christian faith is much more Biblical. The early church was profoundly countercultural. It proclaimed Jesus in terms reserved exclusively for Caesar. That was a capital offense. But they did it anyway. Where
      [exactly] do ‘conservative’ churches evidence that radical, countercultural faith and practice?

      Christian Socialist

      1. CS (not Lewis),

        Socialism at its core is radically anti-Christian, so I don’t understand how one can defend Socialism on the one hand, and yet try to claim to defend Christianity at the same time. Although, I can understand how one can be naive and gullible and think that the two beliefs go hand-in-hand.

        I was referring to the overall ethos of the site. It doesn’t seem to be “the occasional poster” who is anti-Christian, atheist, etc.; it seems to be pretty much the majority. That is fine. No one has a problem with that. The ads and info on the site seem to imply that this is a place to talk about IFB foibles, and IFB foibles only. It has transitioned into a site that mocks all things Biblical, Christian, and/or conservative. I’m not claiming that “Darrell” did this on purpose, but the site has seemed to evolved into that type of place.

        1. Stacy. If you have time, would you give me your opinion of the following people (assuming you know who all of them are and just a word or two for each will suffice unless you want to elaborate).

          Billy Graham, Andy Stanley, Max Lucado, Jase Robertson, Steve Anderson, John MacArthur, Jesse Morrell – long shot that you know the last one.

        2. Dear staceymcanderson:

          God exists as an eternal society of three persons in ageless, unbroken communion. The social component of life derives from Trinitarian life.

          God made all humanity in his own image. However effaced and marred, God’s image establishes an indissoluble connection between each other and God.

          The creational/cultural mandate to keep the garden/earth presumes unrestricted access to the abundance that the earth supplies.

          Yahweh so covenanted with Abraham and his descendants that all males were marked with a sign. This became the basis of a new community and perpetuates that relationship into perpetuity. It also shows that YHWH’s dealings with us are corporate/social in nature.

          Yahweh gave the Sabbath and the Jubilee. As practiced, these institutions gave rest to all living in the land, prevented permanent dispossession from the land, end ended extremes of poverty and wealth.

          The great salvation event of God’s ancient people is the liberation of Ysra’el from Egypt. It is the OT equivalent to the cross of Christ. That salvation included liberation by means of refusal to serve the system of ideology/idolatry/authority/coercion/extortion/injustice/oppression in that time and place.

          Israel’s legal code required compassionate expression and civil attitudes toward all. Especially remembered were the weak and needy, such as women, children, the sick and aged, aliens, widows, and any who for any reason were marginalized by society.

          Many Psalms connect mercy, justice righteousness, loving-kindness and truth, and employ these themes in Israel’s liturgy. So Ysra’el’s worship necessarily entailed a strong, social component.

          Israel’s prophets railed against societal and economic injustice, and cited these things as the ground of judgment and expulsion from the land.

          Jesus’ Lu 4:18-19 Manifesto is based on the year of year of Jubilee, and it functions as the interpretive core of Luke’s record. Luke’s understanding of kingdom has a powerful, social component.

          Revelation is an agelessly kingdom of God critique/manifesto of Rome’s political blasphemy and economic extortion enforced by military hegemony and supported by apostate religion. Think about it.

          Introduced at creation, the social component is revisited at the consummation. It is woven in Israel’s worship, and it is attached to the covenant and the sign, the Sabbath, the Exodus, the civil code, the Psalms and prophetic preaching of Isaiah, Amos, Micah and others. It also defines the core of Jesus’ preaching in Luke’s record, and it has a significant role in casting John’s vision report, the Revelation. Moreover, that social component is analogous of the nature of the Trinitarian life.

          Moses said that by two or three witnesses, truth is established. It seems that many witnesses attest that Biblical faith has a very strong, social component. If I’m to abandon this Biblical witness, be ready to offer a massive weight of crushing exegesis, marked by clean, incisive, dissecting, penetrating, exacting, luminescent analysis at every point. Of course whereas you see that these systems are so antithetical, perhaps this will be no challenge for you.

          Yes, Paul said that a man who refuses to work can refuse to eat. So did Marx, so even that may not be the clean break from socialism you seek. Moreover for every such text you produce, I can post multiple texts condemning greed and associated violations.

          Still, if you think that Free Market, for profit Capitalist political economy pictures more Biblically how God’s grace is mediated to the world, I’m more than willing to listen to your case.

          On the other issue, I’m not responsible for what others post, only my own posts. Others come and go, but plenty of committed Christians frequent Darrell’s forum. And even if they didn’t, I likely would. That idea of ‘witness’ dies hard.


          Christian Socialist

        3. CS, I’ve said many times before and continue to believe, that if you read the book of Genesis and don’t know the answer to the question “Am I my brothers keeper” by the end of the book when Joseph is saving his 11 brothers who sold him into slavery because God gave him the responsibility & ability to save his brothers, then you aren’t going to understand the rest of the Scriptures.

        4. Christian Socialist, I loved what you wrote in the comment starting “God exists as an eternal society.” It’s so good I’m copying and saving it in a private note on facebook so I can reread it and think about it.

      2. CS, your words are always refreshing. The evangelical and fundamental churches have (largely) conflated conservative republican politics with Christianity. In their black and white world, one cannot be a Christian and a liberal (and certainly not both a socialist and a Christian).

        You know all this, of course. I think that this fusion of the right wing and evangelicalism has driven thousands out of the church.

      3. Re: conservatism being unlike early Christianity.

        This is easy enough to counter. Early Christianity was a minority religion. When Christianity became the default religion in the Roman Empire, it could by definition no longer be counter-cultural.

        The issue is that there are different ideologies that fall under the name “conservatism.” I’m told fairly often by Tea Baggers that I’m not a true conservative. It’s ludicrous… my views are much more ancient than theirs and have stood the test of time.

    4. You need to get out more Stacymanderson. Book a trip to Maui, let your hair down and just relax. Leave the kids with a sitter. Make your man do all the cooking and cleaning for a couple weeks. It’s not healthy to be carrying around so much negativity all of the time. It’s okay, you need to vent. I understand you have found your platform. Unlike you, I can empathize. However, if you do decide you need help, there are lots of professionals out there that can provide real professional guidance (and medication) for your condition. I found them. You can too. They really do work miracles!

    5. “The biggest problem with this site is that its dishonest facade fools a lot of people”

      It seems you didn’t bother to read the “about” content, upper right hand corner.

      I knew what I was getting into reading this blog from the beginning. Nothing dishonest.

    6. The radical left lol. Why is it that conservative politics are supposed to go hand in hand with being a Christian?

    7. Dear stacymcanderson:

      You’ve given me no cause for offense, although one may question how nice any lady can be who sleeps with a 65 pound American Pit Bull Terrier at the foot of the bed and has a full beard.

      As for the incongruity of socialism and Christian faith, you can address the many points I’ve listed at any time.

      The one point where you cross the line is your ‘Obama Socialist leftist’ statement. As with others, I now defy you to produce the name of one, erudite, socialist scholar on this planet who would point to President Obama and say, ‘there is one of ours.’ You can’t do it.

      There is no proper ‘left’ in the United States. Citing attacks on the working class, expansion of President Bush’ for-profit discretionary wars and the expansion of President Bush’ PATRIOT Act/domestic spying program, the World Socialist Web Site as late as this year said that President Obama is the most right-wing President in US history. Yet you besmirch the socialist banner by association with the likes of President Obama.

      Why do you do this, stacymcanderson? Have you read one title by a genuinely socialist scholar? Have you read the platform of any Socialist Party? You take offense to war as a standing [permanent] platform. Did you know that the Socialist Party USA demands that the US military budget be slashed by 50%? Did you know that the Socialist Equality Party US calls for slashing the total US military budget by 85%? Did you know that the SEP also calls for the use of those funds to replace our collapsing infrastructure with massive, massive rebuilding project the likes of which has not been seen in the modern world?

      Had you actually referenced a genuinely socialist platform, you would see immediately that the ‘Obama Socialist’ line is demonstrably untrue. Remember, stacymcanderson – no erudite socialist claims President Obama as her/his own. You are of course welcome to support any reactionary program you like [including the Republicrat program]. But to do so with principle requires that you hold that position knowledgably.

      No one is more critical of the policies of the Obama administration than socialists. But the difference between socialist criticisms and those of the right is that the former criticisms are at least intelligent.

      Christian Socialist

  19. What’s really sad is that many of the people who hang out here have gone way overboard and have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. Because so many of them did have a legitimately bad experience in “fundamentalism” (not the true meaning of the word, in that it’s a defense of the Bible), they have gone extreme and have rejected God, the Bible, and anything remotely conservative. It’s like going to McDonald’s and not liking a new flavored shake. Instead of deciding that you don’t like the new flavor shake, you completely and absolutely take it over-the-top and reject all things McDonald’s, just because of one bad experience in a tangential issue that in no way represents the whole or even close it.

      1. I’m right here BJg!!! Perhaps the bathwater has gotten to cold. Maybe we could warm the bathwater. But then there’s the chance we’ll burn the baby. Probably better just to throw the baby out, see if the baby is really a baby or just a lump of nasty mucous. Once we have determined the baby IS a baby, we pick the baby up and ever so lovingly clean it up and hold it close and dear to our hearts.

      2. Dear Bald Jones grad:

        Be careful with that ‘baby-and-bathwater’ thing! People may misunderstand and get the idea you’re baptizing them! Blessings!

        Christian Socialist

    1. Wherever did you get the idea that Christianity is supposed to be conservative?

      Christ came to change things. He didn’t come to keep the rich in power, to keep women subservient, to endorse traditional viewpoints of Scripture, etc. He came to radically change the heart.

      Those who think Christianity is conservative have utterly missed the point. Take care of the sick, feed the poor, meet the needs of the widows and the orphans, promote justice. These are things God has said He values. So should we.

      1. I read Acts 4:32-35. Uhhhhggg, I DON’T LIKE THAT. I don’t, I don’t, I don’t!!!!! Why don’t I like it? Because it sounds like socialism. That’s what it sounds like. Actually, it sounds border line communistic!!!!

        There’s one passage of scripture you will most likely never hear pulled out of context here in the USA. I am thankful that there is enough other scripture that talks about if a man doesn’t work he shouldn’t eat and stuff like that that we can say the Bible does NOT condone a socialistic / communistic form of government. BUT, this passage is interesting for the conservative, right-wing, “red-blooded American” like myself.

        1. Yup, there are lots of things the Bible says that people don’t like. Read the book of James. Luther didn’t like that book. Most fundamentalists don’t seem to like it, either. James 5 is a flat condemnation of the rich, and boy do today’s rich people fit the descriptions of those he is condemning!

          Paul’s admonition was that if a person *would not* work, he shouldn’t eat. It was to discourage mooching. But it says nothing about a person or his family starving because all the jobs have been outsourced overseas and there literally are no jobs which can provide a living. Conservatives tend to blame the victims for their own lack, when it is the rich who have stolen the livelihoods away from people, pervert justice, and so on.

          Norm, I would say that if you looked through the Scriptures, you would find far more admonitions to social justice than blaming the poor for their own plight. I challenge you to do that. Much of it is in the Old Testament, the Prophets.

          You should understand as well that the Scriptures have never endorsed a purely capitalistic society. In fact, in the Law there were some very strict and (dare I say it) Socialist regulations on the Israelite economy!

          Conservatism appears to be much like fundamentalism in that it is interested in making everyone else do what *they* want. Conservatism gives companies, corporations, and the rich wide freedoms while restricting the rights of individuals. Liberalism tends to view companies, corporations, and the rich with due suspicion, desiring to grant greater freedom to individuals to make their own decisions, greater rights to economic access and equity, and protections against becoming enslaved to the will of the corporations.

          I am proud to be a liberal.

        2. Hold the horses back just a titch rtg 🙂 . I can’t get into an educated discussion with you on the Bible’s recommendations of forms of government. That is something I’d be interested in looking into.

          But if you want to use God’s laws for Israel’s economic community as a basis for any nation’s economic community and laws today, you’re gonna have to bring everything. Such as the death penalty for stealing. One thing is for sure. If you put thieves to death, they won’t steal again. But that kind of throws the new covenant of grace that we are under out the window doesn’t it?

          This discussion would probably go better in a “live” setting.

        3. Actually, there was no death penalty for stealing. Look it up. The penalty was to pay it back, fourfold. No imprisonment. No long years of unproductive lockup. Just pay it back, plus.

          And how about those laws regarding just weights and measures? Or the ones telling the landowners they could not reap the edges of their fields, but had to leave that for the poor to reap. Welfare, anyone? The owner couldn’t even pick up grain he dropped while reaping!

          That doesn’t say anything about the fact that every seven years all debts were supposed to be canceled. Or that every 50 years the land was supposed to return to the families who had originally owned them.

          I just get tired of people equating Capitalism with “God’s way” of running an economy, but having no real Scripture to back it up.

          I am not intending to pick at you. I just commented. And *if* we are to be told that we need to act in a Biblical manner, what about the economy? Why not there?

          (Remember, I am trying to promote discussion. I am not trying to bash you! I rather enjoy sparring a bit.)

        4. Norm,

          I know of most of the people on your list, although not all of them. I don’t have time to comment now, but will perhaps later. By the way, I am not one who is big into criticizing people, so any comments I might make would be about their teachings, not them as a person. I even feel kind of bad for making fun of Christian Socialist’s beliefs. I’m not criticizing her personally; she’s probably a very nice lady! Her ideas are completely out to lunch and bizarre, but she probably is sincere and is just very naive to actually believe that Socialism is a legitimate system.

        5. Well, that’s what I was really asking was what you think about their teachings. But, their teachings have to come from their mind, which is intertwined with their soul, so, I guess technically, when you talk about their “teachings” you are talking about the person.

        6. Whew, politics AND religion. This conversation / discussion can go anywhere, but, wherever it ends it won’t be good. Maybe we better stop while we’re ahead… or atleast while we’ve broke even. If you feel like you need to make one more comment to break even, please do, but I think I’ll read it and that will be it for me 🙂 .

        7. rtg. Sparring is definitely welcomed. I’m getting better at not having a chip on my shoulder and realizing that I can have my views and you (or anyone else) can have their views and just because they still have their views after the sparring match (and I still have mine) doesn’t mean either of us are wrong (even though, obviously, if they disagree with me they are wrong, JUST KIDDING) and neither of us lost, we simply had a discussion.

        8. I mean, I see what your saying about the Israelite economy having socialistic tones in it. But take not reaping the “edges of the field”. If one man had a 10 acre field and another man had a 100 acre field, you still left the edges. The one with the 100 acre field didn’t have to leave 90 acres so that he only kept 10 acres like the 10 acre man. This is a kind of fun discussion. Hopefully it’s not “unprofitable”.

        9. Not unprofitable at all.

          I agree that the rich person did not have a 90% tax. But then, neither do rich people here in the US. There never was a time when rich people had to pay 90% of all their income. Income taxes have always been graduated.

          By the way, do you know who invented the idea of the income tax? Joseph, in Egypt. It was a flat 20% tax. What was it used for? A government operation to feed the people when they were starving from famine. It was, in a big way, a redistribution of wealth. (Of course, by exempting the religious caste, it enriched the priests and gave them much more power).

          I might would be in favor of a flat-tax IF taxes and fees from all sources were considered with regard to tax rates. But really, a progressive tax is not a bad idea. To whom much is given, much shall be required.

    2. I’ve been here a long time, and I’ve found that most have neither rejected God nor the Bible. Quite the opposite. They’ve dug deeper into the Bible, and discovered serious fallacies in the teachings of IFB churches, which has created a deeper faith.

    3. I haven’t been inside a McDonalds in at least five years.

      And no, not the drive-thru either.

  20. Dear Scott S.:

    As opposed to fundamentalism, which makes its own rules, proclaims everything they decide as the word of God, and declares everyone who questions them to be a child of the devil.

    Christian Socialist

    PS: Darrell — please make ‘Emails from Fundies’ a regular feature here.

    1. That almost sounds like the name of a book. Tuesdays With Morrie. E-Mails from Fundies’.


      I want to add that for the most part if a fundamentalist/IFB comes in here and is respectful in his or her approach they will for the most part be respectfully treated in return. There are always the odd sarcastic poster who has to mix things up (ignore them) but for the most part you will be allowed to have your say. If you come in here determined to show us the error of our ways, preach at us, throw out of context scriptural references at us, SHOUT AT US, without acknowledging the truth of what is presented here don’t be surprised if you are not welcomed with open arms.

    2. I’ve been wondering what you’ve been up to, C.S.

      Glad to see you back.


  21. Stacy, I’m a right-wing conservative. I love my country and am patriotic. I also love this blog, because it helped me navigate away from a false gospel that was preached and taught, and moved me to a more Christo-centric view of Christianity.

    For that, I am ever thankful to Darrell for his blog. And Stacy, if you’re afraid of various denominations and liberal ideas because they challenge your preconceived notions, perhaps the ideas and beliefs you have deserve some scrutiny anyway.

    Some of the liberals that post here have given me food for thought. I challenge you to check out Darrell’s Obama Year and consider things you’ve probably never challenged yourself with before.

  22. Love this blog, love this site. I’ve laughed more and discovered more funny things involving culottes than I ever knew existed. Thank you Darrell.

  23. Oh Stacy, big sigh…You have illustrated one of the main reasons I have been unchurched for the last year. I am burned out on christianity being labled right-left. Then it is carried into the political arena and becomes you are not a christian if you don’t watch Fox News.

    Just so very tired of Americanized, mochaccinoized, politicalized, first world christianity.

    1. “Unchurched”–that’s an ugly word.

      Mykingdom, you haven’t been inside a church for at least a year. I haven’t been inside a courthouse for much longer than that, but that doesn’t mean I’m a law-breaker.

      Sometimes it’s good to take a break from church-going for a while.

    2. My Horse,

      When did I ever say I liked Fox News? They are pro war and always talk about soldiers as “heroes.” The military has been over in Iraq and Afghanistan protecting from “terrorists” now for what, over a decade? And what has been acccomplished??? About the only good thing the military has done is to protect the poppy crops in order to insure that the worldwide drug trade has been in full force with no disruptions. Obama is as pro war as Fox News is, if not even more. I don’t agree with either one. So no, just because I’m not a pro-Obama Socialist leftist, that does not mean that I’m a neo-con either.

  24. Unfortunately, my reference to Catholics as “mackerel snappers” derailed my original intent when I wrote my post. What I really wanted to do was to dispel the myth that anyone who is critical of any minister or religious denomination is somehow guilty of heresy. By citing Martin Luther’s taking issue with the only existing church of his day, my intent was to demonstrate that Christians should be free to critically examine church doctrines and ecclesiastical leaders. No individual should be exempt just because they have the title “Reverend” in front of their name.

    I have fallen out of favor from some friends that I have known for a long time because I have suggested that I am not qualified to declare that practicing Catholics will not make it heaven. (They are certain that no Catholics will be in heaven.)

    1. Heehee can’t wait to see those people and say “surprise I’m your new heavenly neighbor! I guess I can fall back on the old fundy “once saved always saved” bit. I was a Protestant for 34 years. And definitely was saved sooo. It should’ve interesting in heaven. Hope so anyway.

  25. What I find extremely arrogant of Scott S. is that he is assigning damnation to you without anyknowledge of who you are. Kind of like my former fundy CEO who declared that those who left HIS fold were “chaff” and persons who needed to be purged during the seven-year-purge (which, according to him, is in fact accomplished every seven years).

    From what I understand, only God Himself knows who are truly His. Our Lord reminded His disciples of this in the parable of the wheat and tares. The identification of the tares was not know until that day when His angels gathered the tares together after growing up among the wheat the whole time. I’m also reminded of the separating of the goats and the sheep. Who did the separating in this parable? God did.

    So, fundy dictator, who gave you the power and knowledge to assign any man or woman to the abode of the damned?

  26. Back today thinking about Scott deeming Darrell’s life “a wasted life.” The Bible is clear that God does not see things as humans do. One doesn’t need to make grand gestures or achieve earthly success to be a success in God’s eyes. Here’s what the Bible says:

    “And if you give even a cup of cold water to one of the least of my followers, you will surely be rewarded.” (Mt. 10:42)

    “Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance. It is the Lord Christ whom you serve” (Col. 3:23-24)

    “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8)

    “God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them” (Heb. 6:10)

Comments are closed.