198 thoughts on “FWOTW: WarningsofWrath.com”

  1. THE Larry from the big argument on the Youth Conference Video thread? Has he left the dark side?

  2. They need a “This site best viewed with your eyes closed” disclosure.

  3. Seems like they’re taking a bit of a breather if you look at their calendar, no events past September 2011. Could be that Joyce Meyer street-preaching event was a bit of a doozy…

    1. The YouTube link shows them “preaching” at events this year.
      Maybe if I ever get to the Peach Drop on New Years Eve I’ll cover the show for SFL. We talk about going, but usually spend a quiet evening with friends and family instead.

  4. It has been Providentially preserved in the
    English language in the Authorized King James 1611 Bible.
    Therefore all other English bibles are not inspired of God, and are
    tools of the Devil to deceive many.

    Couldn’t they have went and used some fact other than the word “authorized” to back this up?

    1. Diagnosis: Idolatry.

      While ignorance is curable, stupid is terminal. KJV worshippers have stage four spiritual cancer.

    2. While I’m pro-KJV, I flatly reject the notion that it is “inspired” – if someone thinks that God gave the words to the KJV translators, that is further revelation, which is forbidden.

      And then there are those who claim that the KJV “preserves the inspiration”, and I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. I was talking to a friend of mine on this subject, and he said that some people think that the Holy Spirit has mystically infused the words with power… as my friend said, isn’t the idea that the proper combination of words have power called “witchcraft”??

      1. Guilt Ridden,
        For what it’s worth, I share your position on this issue.
        Bro Bluto

  5. Missionary Questionnaire:

    “Do you believe a Preacher is disqualified if he or his wife have ever been unfaithful in anyway to each other?(Examples: Adultery, Holding hands or any other physical contact with anyone other than their spouse, romantically communicating in any way with anyone other than their spouse)?”

    I guess pastors that shake hands with and/or baptize women cannot get support…

    “Do you believe and Preach that all inter-racial dating and marriages are wrong?”

    Ooooh…look at the great concern about getting doctrine right… πŸ™„

    and don’t forget to check out the Personal Holiness Page (bottom)!


    1. WOW! More of the interracial marriage blatant racism. I assumed that was long gone by the time I was in jr high in the 80s.

      1. I so want to fill out the missionary questionnaire, maybe pose as a homosexual NIV contemporary music preacher.

        That ought to get their blood pressure up.

      2. I have a friend who believes “inter-racial” relationships are wrong, not just black-white, but even Caucasian-Asian. Yet, he is Gentile married to a Jew. I have yet to understand that justification.

        1. If she’s only Jewish by blood but converted to Real True Xianity, then she’s sort of okay. But if she still follows those who rejected JAY-zuz and refuses to worship at the feet of the Man-O-Gi–er at the Cross, then she’s doubly damned. πŸ‘Ώ

        2. From my ‘Fundy Human Race 101’ class: Noah’s son Shem was the father of all Semitic peoples, including the Hebrews. Cursed son, Ham fathered the branch of humanity that settled in Egypt. Japheth is the son that fathered all the ‘white’ people, who do not marry into the branches of Shem, or Ham


      Shucks, I commit adultery every time I say grace at dinner. Not to mention when my church group prays.

      1. I wish you hadn’t brought that up. Now I don’t know what to do in a few weeks when my kids are at home visiting.

        I guess to avoid sin we won’t be able to eat.

      2. Is it still adultery if both parties are wearing condoms, er gloves? πŸ˜€

      3. Inter-racial marriages are wrong? Where does it say that in the NEW Testament? ( I must have been interpreting Galations 3:28 wrong)

    3. I checked their missionary page. They have five listed.

      So all five missionary couples are against interracial marriage?

      1. Oh, for Pete’s sake. It’s just cereal.
        People who get worked up about this just need to take a pill or something.

    1. Uh-oh. I’m lost. I have shorts on right now. So does almost everybody here in South Texas. Give us a break– it was 98 degrees here yesterday afternoon, and will be about the same today.

      1. Not only am I wearing shorts,but I’m about to work in the front yard in a sleeveless shirt also.

      2. I’m so happy I can wear shorts again. As soon as the weather got above 50 degrees this spring I pulled out the one pair of shorts I have that I wore on vacation 4 years ago (obviously on our private beach in Florida that we rented out with no one within 5 miles to see me in my nakedness).

        This past Sunday I was out in my driveway in shorts washing my car as some fundies drove by on the way home from their church. I guess the whole family had to go to the alter after seeing that.

    2. I am at my church right now working on some Bible school stuff, and my Pastor came in to see if I needed anything. He was wearing shorts, and I am, too. πŸ™„

    3. It being 100 degrees today, I’m so glad I left fundamentalist rules.

    4. Ouch!! I was banned from speaking at a Christian camp in Wisconsin (after several speaking engagements over a 3 year period) because the camp director’s (dictator’s) daughter saw me wearing shorts after an early morning (pre-dawn) run. I was given the “Hatchett”.

      Ironically, several years later, a teen drowned in the lake during church camp, wearing sweat pants because it was the church policy that no one wear shorts while swimming. Tragic…

      1. That makes me just plain mad. I live in the desert southwest, love swimming, and have therefore researched sun protective clothes that are made for swimming. Something like this is A LOT better than sweats.
        Or, if you can’t afford something like this, a pair of active wear tights is a lot cheaper than this, and they are safer than swimming in sweats. Or do they not allow that because they are form fitting? But if you’re being hidden by the water the form fitting part shouldn’t matter!

        1. I try to cover up on the beach to keep the sun from nuking my skin, which is very pale except when it’s peeling off from sunburn.
          It don’t know if I’m ready to go with the whole-body swimsuit, but it might be better than skin cancer.
          Sweats are just out of the question, though. Why not swim with an anchor tied to you?

  6. Under Appearance:
    1.Men-Hair should be off collar and ears, neatly combed, facial hair must be neat.

    Since my mustache extends below my chin, do I have to braid it, or is neatly combed suitable?

    1. I’d like to find Biblical justification for short hair & no or “neat” facial hair on men.

        1. You don’t even have to read the Bible just look at the orthodox Jews and you’ll realize that Bible at least strongly suggests having long hair & unkept beards on men. πŸ™‚

    2. I wonder if the folks here are jumping on the Duck Dynasty bandwagon because they are professing Christians. Or do the DD beards disqualify them? Or Uncle Si?

      1. I’m in trouble, then. When I’m look down, the mustache touches the collar of my t-shirt. When I look straight or up, my hair touches the back of my collar. It often sits on my ear.

        To quote the great Linus Van Pelt, “I’m doomed!”.

        1. I guess you need some mustache wax to make it stick straight out, then, Uncle W.

        2. @Uncle Wilver; Linus Van Pelt (the little philosopher) is my hero. When we had twins (boy, girl) I lobbied for naming them “Linus and Lucy”. Vetoed by my beloved, the names were relegated to our Welsh Corgi pups.

          Thanks for the great quote!

        3. @Troublewit, they would have even had their own theme song, thanks to Vince Guaraldi. The Wynton Marsalis Septet cover is great.

        4. Troublewit, I’m just glad you didn’t name the twins Spot and Rover … um … did you? 😐

        5. Uncle Wilver, to keep your moustashe under control, try a mixture of three of sand one of cement…..

  7. Looking at the pictures of the “street preaching” I can just feel the love of Christ oozing from these people that look like God’s hit men and have signs that say very little about Jesus Christ!

    1. Oh, dear.
      The stepstool their street preacher stands on is the same model I have in my fish room. Maybe I’d better get rid of mine, just to avoid the appearance of being a jerk.

  8. A. Each Preacher (Men only) must meet the qualifications given in
    I Timothy 3:2-7 & Titus 1:6-9.

    NOT FAIR! Women preachers don’t get a rule sheet!

  9. Another church hoping to become the next Westboro?

    I note that Romans 2 tells us that the Goodness of God brings us to repentance. But elsewhere in Scripture, the judgment of God has never brought about repentance of any lasting nature.

    In any case, I am done with believing in a God of Hate. All that hate ever does is reinforce in the mind that the hater is against you, does not love you, will not accept you, and is untrustworthy. Somehow, when Jesus said, “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do” I don’t think He was saying, “Forgive them only if they change their mind and believe on me.”

    Jesus did not hold a warning sign against the woman taken in adultery. He did not picket the tax collectors. He was a friend of sinners whose love could change the life.

    1. Clearly in Scripture we see that God hates sin. But nowhere does God ever hate sinners! He always, always loves them and wants to save them. The hateful attitude of places like this FWOTW… I just don’t get it. Do they honestly believe God hates sinners? I guess they must. So do they believe they’re the only ones God loves, because they’re the only ones doing what’s “right”? To that, I can only cite Romans 3:10–there is none righteous (including YOU, full-of-yourself better-than-thou Pharisees).

      (I think I could cite that verse with regards to most of the places that get mentioned here, though!)

      Us not ever being capable of being “good enough” for God to love us is kind of a major theme of Scripture. Any group that misses that cannot possibly be truly Christian.

      1. I spent last week in the United Arab Emirates. I was truly amazed at the love, tolerance, and general humanity taught by the (state controlled) Imams. It is a weird cognitive dissonance for a Westerner to realize that all kinds of Muslims are far more tolerant, gracious, and loving than many that claim the name of Christ.

        1. What are their rules toward women? If all women regardless of religion HAVE to wear a head-covering, I have no respect for their “love” or “tolerance”.

        2. My grandfather spent time in Kuwait a few years ago, and he said the same thing. He was very Christian, and when he went there he asked an official he was meeting with if there were any churches – the official, who was a Muslim, basically said “Oh heck yeah!” and they picked up another official who was Christian, and they all went to church. Grandpa could never say enough about the kindness and tolerance he experienced there. He’d cry every time he talked about his experiences.
          Try imagining a Christian official here cheerfully going to mosque with a Muslim visitor . . .

        3. “Try imagining a Christian official here cheerfully going to mosque with a Muslim visitor . . .”

          If he were IFB he would go cheerfully. With a handful of Chick Tracts.

        4. Islam considers Christians to be “people of the Book.”

          Christianity considers Islam to be either an entirely different faith, or (historically) a heretical sect.

        5. They do not require their women to wear anything (but they are expected to wear something). Many of them choose the traditional dress (as do most of the men), but the women who hold executive positions dress in western style pants suits or something appropriate.

  10. From the screenshot alone I know I’m gonna love this place… “The Sodomites have come out of the closet, and the churches and preachers have went into them!” No, that would be “gone”. “Have gone”.

    Although to be honest, “have went” is pretty common, particularly in Southern dialects. If the creators are in fact Southern, I might be inclined to forgive them.


    1. No. No forgiveness. I’m a Fundy High grad from North Central GA, and know the difference between “went” and “gone”. They should only be interposed for sarcastic purposes.

    2. Fundies complain about our pointing out their bad grammar, but these people are claiming that a 400-year-old translation of the Bible is the only true Scripture. How can they be trusted to adequately understand and explain the KJV if they can’t consistently follow the rules of English grammar?

      1. If they followed the rules of grammar, they would lose a lot of their so called doctrine. It is only through inaccurate word manipulation that they come up with many of their beliefs.

        I don’t miss living in Fundystan at all.

    3. Well… “have retreated” would be even better to express his meaning, but “have gone” fits better as a parallelism with “have come” (come & gone).

    4. So the Sodomites came out off the closet and the preachers went into the same closet in order to see what’s so fascinating in there… 😈
      Wasn’t that supposed to be a Catholic issue? oh boy i am in trouble now.

    5. Notice that “CLOSET” is singular, but “PREACHERS HAVE WENT IN THEM.” “THEM” is plural. So the “THEM” the preachers “have went in” must be … “THE SODOMITES”?? 😯

  11. O.M.FG! I have seen some train wreck sites in my time but this is one of the worst. All that red and black, looks like a bad goth dating site. Talk about appearance of evil! πŸ˜€

  12. One of the largest sections of their doctrine statement is the section on Sentencing and punishment.

    The priorities are obvious, I don’t think I saw the word love once on their website.

      1. Here is the sentance the use the word “love” for the one time on their website:

        ” He will destroy all sinners Himself. This will not demonstrate the Love of the Lamb of God, but the Wrath of the Lamb. ”

        The one time is negative toward love. WOW!

  13. These guys make me ashamed to be from the same state as them. My blood is boiling.
    Anyone else believe that if you need a usename and password to get into the members’ page then some red flags should go off? That screams “Cult”.

    1. Not me…there may be things that the “family” wants to remain private. I don’t want all my junk waved around on the ‘net but I want to be open with my church.

    2. I think our church has a members only page. Part of the reason is that we have a list of members and their addresses and phone numbers (those who agree to have them listed) so members can contact each other. We don’t want that out there for the general public to read.

      The church might also list prayer requests here, requests that someone doesn’t mind the church seeing but not the world.

  14. I don’t even want to know what those preachers are hiding in their closets. I just saw a “support Schaap” FB page a few days ago, and I was grossed out by the number of youth pastors who had joined it.

    Youth pastors supporting Schaap. I’m not sure it gets much viler than that.

  15. Wait – women who wear pants are cross dressers? Well, that’s awesome! So we no longer have to worry about pants causing good fundy men to stumble since good fundy men would NEVER lust after a cross-dressing hussy, amiright?

    1. Would a man wearing women’s pants be classified as a cross dresser by them too?

  16. You’d think their warnings of wrath would be more effective if they didn’t use the KJV words — “evil concupiscence.” I don’t think ANYONE’S going to feel convicted hearing that. They might get a hysterical fit of the giggles, maybe. (Or was that just me when someone preached on that in church when I was a kid?)

    1. “Concupiscence” sounds like some kind of fancy dessert pastry you’d be served in a super-expensive restaurant.

      They’d sound more erudite if they knew the correct conjugation of the verb “to go,” though.

      1. I took my wife to a Mediterranean restaurant last week and we got a concupiscence to eat later in the evening at home.

        Oh, never mind. I was just reminded it was a cannoli. Either way, it was good.

        1. No, you did not have ‘a cannoli.’ You had a cannolo. Cannoli is properly the Italian plural for cannolo.

          There’s a pizza place in town that has a sign boasting “Fresh Cannolis.” Makes me cringe every time I drive by.

        2. At that pizza place, theys doesn’t knows theirs plural from their singulars.

        3. They don’t knows howta makes pizza, neither. Spent $10 for 4 slices a couple weeks ago & it was vile. My reaction was, “I’ll eat this, but I am highly offended by it.” πŸ˜•

  17. First of all, let me say they lost me at “have went”. But after reading the comments, I had went back to view the sight. I have two questions.
    1. If the scriptures are divinely inspired, how can translations be of the devil if they are as true to the original text as is possible in any translation? (This issue is very confusing to me)
    2. Why is the doctrine of scriptures placed above the doctrine of the Trinity?

    1. As for #1, I still don’t get how just one translation can be the only one that isn’t evil.

      Either you insist on the originals in the original languages (as Muslims do with the Quran), or you allow translations.

      The KJV Onlyists have added a whole other Testament to Christian doctrine, about the immaculate transmission of the King James translation, but their evidence for this revelation is sketchy, and factually incorrect in several places. I find it easier to believe that Joseph Smith, digging in his back yard, found an unknown Biblical manuscript written on gold tablets (which, by the way, I don’t believe) than that the translators who produced the KJV accomplished a miracle that has never been equalled before or since.

      1. The thing that I totally don’t get about the KJV-onlyists is how they, while practically deifying their version, are also willing to hack it up! The KJV INCLUDED THE APOCRYPHA! They consider the KJV so perfect, yet they throw out the Apocrypha. That is utterly inconsistent.

        1. The overwhelming majority of KJVO people have never heard that the Apocrypha was part of the 1611.

  18. From their Ethics page:

    “We want our attitude (disposition) to be Christlike .”



    1. Accountable to God.

    Lord Don’s Asiomi on Accountability states: “When one is only accountable to “God” then they will soon become the only “god” they are accountable to.”

    B. Each person helping in the evangelistic efforts (men or women) must be in good standing with the local Church and under the leadership of their Pastor.

    -CULT WARNING- Danger Will Robinson, Danger

    From the Pastor’s blog:

    If they are not members in a Bible preaching, doctrinally sound church, they need to be in order to be right with God.

    no-o-o… that is only if they want to be right with the god of the pastor’s imagination. Talk about violating Revelation 22:18

    Women are excluded from preaching at all, to anyone.

    Obviously this clown has no earthly idea what “preaching” is and he really should spend some more time in Acts.

    So brethren, if you are saved, called to preach, doctrinally sound, in right standing with your church, meet the Biblical qualifications, and have the KJBible-then PREACH.

    Really? more extrabiblcal requirements… *sigh*

    1. “asiomi”???? george, what was that?
      Axiom… Lord Don’s Axiom on Accountability

    2. Lord Don, you should know by now that the word translated preach does not really mean “to proclaim” or share. That is a liberal watering down. It means scream personal opinion loud enough and long enough to convince.

      Sheesh. I thought you knew better, with your background and geographic location.

  19. Judging by the Recent Comments list, Big Gary, Don, and UncleWilver need more to do.

    I’ll be back later to check comments. I have eight bushes to plant along the front of the house.

    1. It’s a lovely day here in Michigan after what seems like weeks of rain and cool weather–and I’m stuck inside at work not able to enjoy it! Landscaping can be hard work, but I kind of envy you right now. πŸ™‚

      1. When Thursday and Friday are your weekend from work,you get to play in the dirt while others toil away behind steel and glass. It’s 82 degrees with a nice breeze and wispy clouds here in central GA. A late lunch is over. Now, to plant some hot pepper plants in a different garden. Not only in shorts and old shirt with cut off sleeves, but I may wear flip-flops too.

  20. I clicked on the page from my work place.

    I’ll probably get sacked in the morning now for accessing objectionable* material, or worse arrested.

    * which it most certainly is

    1. I’m afraid to click on it for that very reason! Our corporate network flashes this menacing-looking “cop” at you when you venture onto a website that Somebody in Authority does not approve of. That includes what S.i.A. considers “hate sites.”

      You don’t get into trouble or anything, but that dang cop is so creepy, I just want to punch him. Especially since he blocks access to perfectly innocuous sites all the time. And, if you accidentally click on something you don’t mean to (like a pop-up or undertone you didn’t even notice, say, for “Meet Christian Singles” or whatever), then you’re made to feel like a freaking criminal. Grrrr….Big Brother.

  21. Can anyone show me in scripture where any New Testament pastor/preacher/apostle/disciple stood and preached condemnation to the culture at large? When the apostles, and godly men stood and preached against sin it was to the believers. Nowhere do we see Paul openly preaching against Idols even when in the midst of the most pagan societies.(to hardcore moralists like we see in today’s post Paul would be a liberal compromiser for not calling out all of Ephesus for their worship of Diana.) Seems to me that Christ was the focus. Christ, the risen Lord was preached, not the crap that is spewing from these (so) Calledβ„’ preachers who stand and call down fire on passersby at secular events. God have mercy on us for that passes as “Christian” these days..

    Matthew 7:21-23
    β€œNot everyone who says to me, β€˜Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, β€˜Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, β€˜I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

    (btw: says the same thing in their KJV idol)

    1. There are numerous Old Testament examples of prophets condemning the culture at large, but I can’t think of any New Testament examples, either.

    2. Your comment reminded me of this passage:

      Luke 9:51-56: And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. and they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. and when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

      The disciples wanted to destroy, but Jesus wanted to seek and to save that which was lost (Luke 19:10). Christ’s Spirit is one of preaching the Truth in love.

    3. I’ve often thought that people like this want to be like John the Baptist. The problem with that is that John the Baptist was preaching BEFORE Christ. Now Christ has come with the GOSPEL – the good news – that God’s wrath was poured out on Christ on our behalf.

    4. There was an excellent essay that I read before on this subject that said precisely what you did… I need to look it up again. Paul certainly taught that those who are saved shouldn’t indulge in sinful parts of the culture they live in, but he was no political activist!

      In fact, I should think the New Testament rather instructs Christians to obey the pre-existing laws of their government (or at least pay taxes in Matthew 22) and live a separated life within the culture, rather than trying to remove themselves entirely from the culture–which as Paul tells us, is impossible (I Cor. 5).

      (Note that I said “those who are saved”. Paul and the other apostles preached first salvation, then how to live a right Christian life. They never called for external change without internal change first!)

    5. I can think of two occasions (from memory, so I’m not sure of the references, but both from Paul, so in Acts):

      – When Paul was preaching to one of those judges hearing him (the one who was married to Bernice, I think), it says the he reasoned of “judgement” and the authority trembled and told him to go away. That sounds like some kind of condemnation involved.

      – On Mars Hill (I think), Paul trashed their idols, calling them the work of men’s hands and says that God is calling men to repent of their trust in the idols. If I remember correctly, that was the group that had issues with Jesus’ resurrection.

      1. Paul before Festus (Acts 25-26) wasn’t preaching “at” King Agrippa, Bernice and Festus. In fact he was merely defending himself against the charges that the Jews had brought against him. By this time Paul had already appealed to Caesar. In Chaper 26 of Acts we see that Paul honors, King Agrippa. In the course of Paul recounting his conversion and testimony is when King Agrippa comes under conviction, not because Paul was openly attacking the culture or society. He specifically defends against doing so.

        At Mars Hill (Acts 17: the Areopagus), again Paul does not bring a railing accusation against their idolatry but uses the altar to the “Unknown god” to preach Christ to those listening. In fact they invited him to speak to them, it wasn’t a case of Paul breaking out a bull-horn, a soap-box and a sandwich board screaming “Turn or Burn!”

        The contrast between what we see in scripture and what is practiced today (especially in the IFB with their strongarm-terrorist tactics evangelism) are poles apart.

        1. I wasn’t think of Fetus, but of your response below; Paul reasoning of righteousness and of judgment certainly sounds like (at least) some railing at sin, which is what the original poster asked.

          At Mars’ Hill, Paul twice called them ‘ignorant’ and that it was foolish to think that the Godhead could be represented by gold, or silver, or the works of men’s hands.

          I agree that it was not a tirade, but he was pointedly telling that that they were wrong and ignorant of the truth.

      2. GR,
        Perhaps you were referencing Paul before Felix in Acts 24.
        After some days Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, and he sent for Paul and heard him speak about faith in Christ Jesus. 25 And as he reasoned about righteousness and self-control and the coming judgment, Felix was alarmed and said, β€œGo away for the present. When I get an opportunity I will summon you.”

        Even here we don’t see Paul preaching a toe-stomping, sin-hattin, devil fighting, spit-slobberin’ sermon against the culture but giving a “reasoned” presentation of Christ, righteousness, self-control and God’s coming judgment of sin.

        I’m not picking on you, btw. It’s just that there is this idea in the IFB (and sometimes we refugees tend to carry it in our luggage after we have left the sinking SS IFBtanic) that it is our job to convict people of their sin, clean them up and then present them to God. When it is enough to preach Christ, him crucified, and his glorious resurrection. That is our commission… all this other stuff, that we see on sites like we have today, is man-made, man-centered, and man-glorifying church growth movement crap.

        In essence, all the attack on culture and public bellowing against sin does is to present a small, inept, helpless, frail god who has to have a midway Barker out front conning people into his sideshow tent. I don’t believe that. I believe that Christ is actively moving in people’s lives and we, as witnesses, are compelled to share what Christ has done in our lives, who he is, and the Gospel… and it is God who gives the increase.

        The focus of such groups as we see in today’s post is on outward sin, on appearance, on man and circumstances… not on Christ. In fact, I’ll go as far as to say what they are doing is using Christ as a prop to sell their own agendas. πŸ˜₯

        1. I don’t feel picked on; I enjoy a discussion of what the Scripture says.

          I fully believe that many in the IFB movement either don’t believe that the Holy Spirit convicts people of sin, or they don’t like the way He does it, because a lot of “preechers” seem to think it is their job to convict people of sin.

          At the same time, the pastor is supposed to reprove, rebuke, and exhort.

          I think one of ingredients missing today in preaching is that the wrath of God is revealed against all unrighteousness… there is imbalance in non-IFB preaching that “God is love” and the “God is holy and requires His people to be holy” seems to be missing. Many IFB preachers are more concerned with numbers and skip the “God is holy” part as well.

        2. I DO think there are many churches that skip the “be ye holy” part. Sadly the “holiness” that is often mentioned is a manufactured, man-made list of extra-Biblical standards instead of Biblical gentleness, kindness, forgiveness, compassion, integrity, etc.

    6. Post of the day! Well said, Don. I just re-read Paul’s address to the Athenians in Acts 17. Even though they were idolators, Paul’s message was focused on preaching Christ NOT ranting against idols.

    7. Can anyone show me in scripture where any New Testament pastor/preacher/apostle/disciple stood and preached condemnation to the culture at large?

      The closest I can come up with isn’t the culture at large, but a sub-culture. The way Jesus spoke to the Pharisees, the fore-fathers of the Fundies.

  22. From their past and future calendar, it appears they have decided to preach against the evil people outside of “Gaither Homecoming” and “Anne Graham Lotz” events.

    1. Thanks, Phil. I had just taken a drink when I read “questionnair” and nearly drenched my keyboard.

    1. Like I said with greg:

      There may be things that the β€œfamily” wants to remain private. I don’t want all my junk waved around on the β€˜net but I want to be open with my church.

  23. They support a family of missionaries to….


    Because, you know, you never can have too many fundy churches in Bojo-land.

    1. They are missionaries who could not raise enough money to move overseas. I told them to give up the slide show and use Powerpoint instead!

  24. …and of course, then there’s the missionaries to that heathen place called:


    Gotta make sure those corn growers know about the KJV!

    1. Well, it’s hog calling time in Nebraska,
      Oh it’s hog calling time in Nebraska,
      Yes it’s hog calling time in Nebraska,
      And it’s hog calling time in Nebraska.

      For when it’s hog calling time in Nebraska,
      Then it’s hog calling time in Nebraska,
      So when it’s hog calling time in Nebraska,
      Well then it’s hog calling time in Nebraska…
      (and so on, ad infinitum) πŸ˜†

  25. I’m sure the weekly KKK meeting schedule is in the “members only” part of the website.

      1. I think I agree. Nasty racist BS website doesn’t need to be exaggerated as KKK, they’re plenty ridiculous in their own racism without the flamboyance.

        1. To paraphrase Dorothy Parker:
          They’re bed enough plain, without making them fancy.

  26. Wonderful. These lunatics are just down the road from me. I think this church is just around the corner from where my brother is a pastor. I’ll have to be on the lookout for them on the streets of Greenville now.

  27. Ok, this is beyond mocking. What a truly disgusting display of hatred and false religion waving the banner of Christ. I just have to grit my teeth and keep mumbling “Christ died for them too” over and over and over under my breath…

  28. I was listening to a morning show on the radio today and they were discussing how only a little over one percent of people polled believe they’re actually going to hell.

    One of the hosts said, “It’s a lot harder to get into heaven than people think!” and he was talking about the ten commandments and how saying Jesus’ name as a curse word was a sin and would send you to hell. He later mentioned how somewhere in the Bible it said that even seeing a woman on the street and thinking about sleeping with her was a sin.

    He already understood the JUDGMENT part. What he didn’t seem to know about was that Jesus died so all of us who fail to keep the commandments CAN be forgiven and CAN go to heaven.

    1. Seems he understands the Law. But not Grace.
      Law without Grace is hopeless dispair, and Condemnation without a chance of reprieve.

      That’s why we need the Gospel, each of us need to be reminded daily of the good news that is the Gospel of Christ. A sure and certain HOPE in what Christ has done in regards to the Law, God’s requirement for Justice, and sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice to pay for our redemption. That is our sure and certain hope!

      1. Heh heh. I know some people from Camden.
        It seems better than Newark, anyway.

        1. There’s also one in Michigan which does the same.
          And FWIW, there’s also a Hell on Grand Cayman Island, which presumably doesn’t. πŸ™„

      2. The entire STATE of New Jersey is hell…trust me…I’ve been condemned to live here for the last 4 years.

  29. The one lady in the nursing home pictures has her arms folded and it looks like she’s thinking, “You are so full of s**t.” :mrgreen:

  30. that site looks like Internet hell complete with flames! and then they asked me to sign their guestbook!!
    Also, ‘the preachers HAVE WENT’???!!!
    In the words of Charlie Brown, “I can’t stand it. I just can’t stand it.”

    1. Cool… Second “Peanuts” quote on the thread. In this one, I could just picture good old Charlie Brown doing a facepalm. Well done…

  31. From their Missionary Questionnaire: “Do you believe and Preach that all interracial dating and marriages are wrong?”

    My answer: “No. Moses had an interracial marriage. When Miriam and others criticized Moses for his wife from a different race, God struck Miriam with leprosy. See Numbers 12. If God was willing to defend Moses against a charge that his mixed marriage was wrong, who am I not to do the same?”

    1. Excellent answer.

      And that example was under the law! How much more free should we be now that we are under grace?

    2. I like to use Acts 17:26 “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;”KJV —“And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth,”ESV To me, that pretty much states that God doesn’t see race.

      I had a pastor once use 2Cor.6:14 “Be ye not unequally yoked together…” as his defense of no inter-racial marriage. When I finished the vers, and challenged him on its meaning, he admitted it didn’t say anything about races, it was just the best he come up with.

      Ahhh, the joy of Fundyness. You are always right in spite of the facts.

      1. My dad used, “God is not the author of confusion” because he said that the children of a inter-racial couple will be “confused” as to their race. “Am I white? black? half-n-half?” So to avoid confusion, everyone should marry in their own race. But my brother married a girl from Latin America. (not that he got my dad’s permission first) Which races are okay to mix and which ones must be kept separate? See? I guess he was right!! It is confusing πŸ™„

        1. I can have some respect for a church that truly believes all inter-racial marriage is wrong (I don’t agree with them), but I have NO respect for a church that claims they are against inter-racial marriage, but is really only against black-white marriages.

          …and I’ve heard that same argument, by the way, that we should not confuse what God has made separate and distinct.

        2. That verse has been stretched and manipulated to cover any number of personal preferences in the church.

          I’ve heard it apply to Bible versions: “Using other versions is confusing. Let’s stick with the KJV.”

          To using guitars/drums: “That’s the sound of confusion in the camp and God is against confusion.”

          To raising hands while singing: “Pentecostals raise hands. Pentecostals speak in tongues. That’s confusing. So we can’t raise hands because then people would confuse us with Pentecostals who use confusing tongues.”

          And, yes, I’ve heard it used against interracial marriage too.

        3. The reply to anyone who prooftexts you with “God is not the author of confusion” is as follows

          “That’s confusing”

      2. The discourse about being “unequally yoked” refers to Christians marrying non-Christians. It’s not about races or nationalities.

        As for confusion, well, everyone on earth has mixed racial ancestry. Is that unconfusing enough for you?

    3. The best part is the leprosy. To punish Miriam, he turned her into a white woman.

  32. BTW, the sodomites may have come out of the closet, but the blasphemers have registered the domain name warningsofwrath.com

  33. The Missionary Questionnaire asks twice if “females wear modest dresses.” Does that mean skirts are not allowed?

    1. Apparently going to “Hellywood” movies is allowed; at least they don’t ask about it. It also asks: “Is it ok to have body piercings, except for female single ear piercings?” Well, what if I got two ear piercings before Christ gloriously saved me, but I only wear earrings in one hole now. Is that ok? Can I still please be a missionary that this church supports?
      “Do you preach that women should wear modest dresses at all times?” Yes, even in bed, and while giving birth…
      And the line for “Names and Ages of Entire Family” does not seem nearly long enough to list the required 8-10 children.
      Okay, I think I’m done now LOL

      1. Too much fun; I want to ask them about about “female married ears piercings”

        1. I guess whether that makes her unbalanced pretty much depends on how heavy that one earring is.

      2. I don’t understand the ear piercing thing; I’ve seen it on other fundy things as well. If wearing jewelry or having piercings is wrong, isn’t it wrong ALL the time? Even if you find a verse that says to never wear jewelry, where’s the verse that says it’s actually okay to wear SOME jewelry, but only have ear piercings and then only one on each ear?

        1. The Bible outlines the ideal lifestyle.

          This historical period I remember with nostalgia, whether or not I lived through it and whether or not what I “remember” is really some TV show or the pictures in my old grade school primers, was also an ideal lifestyle.

          Therefore, anything I think of with nostalgia as a feature of a better, purer, simpler time must be supported by a Bible verse, even if I can’t find one.

    2. β€œDo you preach that women should wear modest dresses at all times?”

      Yes, especially in the bath tub or shower.

  34. No recent events listed. No pictures after 2010.

    Did they have a sex scandal? A gay one, obviously. Followed by a schizm, or raft of expulsions, including the one member who knew how to do the webpage?

    1. Usually it’s sex, or embezzlement. Sometimes it’s just that one family that won’t get with the program of pretending that everything is hunky dory and everybody who works with the church is wonderful, and so people start taking sides pro and con, and then you get a schism.

      Wonder who’s paying to keep the site up.

    2. It doesn’t really take a scandal to stop a web site in its tracks. All it takes is for the one member who keeps up the site to move away, or leave the church, or die, or get sick, or just get too busy to do it.

  35. K, I’m late to the party so don’t know if y’all have went in this direction already.

    Tried to read the doctrinal statement but couldn’t get past point #1: ‘The Holy Bible…was Divinely dictated to Holy Men of God as they penned it down in their own literary styles.’ How can one take dictation in one’s own literary style?

  36. Their fisrt point in “ethics” is “appearance” – dead giveaway!
    And they want all men to wear pants? Sissies! Real Men (TM) wear KILTS!


        1. Hmm. I get no ads or requests for money when I click on it.
          Sorry if you’re getting something other than just a picture.

  37. The verse in Colossians on the wrath of God, cited on the homepage, is actually parenthetical to the gracious exhortation Paul is giving to the Colossians. These folks are making the side point the only point.

    1. You know they’d just cry persecution. πŸ™„

      Wonder what they’d do if you posted the chapter and verse citations for God’s own explanation (via prophecy) of why He blasted the Sodomites.

Comments are closed.