I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

[Minace]

Hi Baptists,

I'm a member of the Anglican communion which makes me as near to being an atheist as makes no difference, so when Jesus came to me in a dream and told me I'll soon be eternally damned I began looking for a real church and my search brought me here.

Now Jesus is a smart guy. Not every Son of God would think to turn Himself into a real living, breathing man so that our religion could be founded on excruciating (pardon the pun) torture and human sacrifice on a cross. But Jesus did, knowing full well that had He wimped out He'd be less deserving of our praise. So when He talks I listen.

My favorite Bible passage is the one in Hosea about "They that sow the wind reap the whirlwind" - its Truth is absolute proof that there's no such thing as anthropogenic climate change. Was President George Bush in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina? Are the CEOs of the big oil companies now over in The Bahamas facing the full brunt of Dorian? Of course not, so they can't be to blame.

[BrotherLarry]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Sister Minace (I assume that's pronounced like Liberace):


Your introduction blesses me although it waxed a bit political towards the end. I wish you had stuck to Jesus and how He has beckoned you through school shootings and lead in the Flint water system to trust in His complete protection. One thing is certain though:


You will find few atheists here. Oh, we do have one arrogant dick that hangs out here but he keeps things interesting so we tolerate his ridiculous belief that there is no God. How can there not be a God when the Bible tells us there is? It's just silly if you ask me.


It only takes a search of these forums to find answers to practically every question you could have about the special way God designed events to happen so that we could share Heaven with Him one day soon. But - and this is important - should you still have need for clarification, Bible scholars (like me) and senior pastors stand ready to tackle anything you throw out. I will fellowship with you as long as you're sincere in your attempts to learn more about the higher heights and deeper depths of the Love of God(c).


Praise Jesus for leading you to the friendliest spot on the Interwebs. How we look forward to sharing the truth with you.


In His Holiness and Truth,
BrotherLarry
Revelation 22:12

[Isabella White]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Dear Miss Minace: May I extend to you a warm, cordial at : . We are pleased that you have found your way here -- hopefully, this will show that you are sincere in your search for Salvation through the shed of the risen , the .

I note that you are currently a member of the -bound Anglican Church. My neighbors are Cathyolicks, and both churches are the same (that's just common knowledge), as many of the bigger Anglican churches have "Lady" Chapels, which amounts to reverence to Mary, instead of 100% devotion to Almighty. Anyway, you're in the right place now!
You will find that we are group of servants of the , and we study only the . We do not use any of those other watered-down versions. And, we do not cherry-pick our favorite verses or ignore the ones that should make you uncomfortable when you are confronted with the fact that you, most assuredly, deserve to burn in for your disgusting, atrocious sinful behavior.

Revelation 21:8 "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

We look forward to learning more of your decision to follow the with us at our friendly church, here, at .

Sincerely, Isabella W.

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Hello Miss Mince, and to God's favorite forums.

I very much like your choice of scripture. Let us look at Hosea 8:7 in its entirety: For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk; the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up.

Hosea is a delightful and most interesting book and Hosea 8 is a particularly fine chapter, illustrating as it does Our Lord's uncompromising nature. It is just the sort of thing that beastly Anglicans choose to ignore, with their drippy hymns.

"Jesus loves me, this I know,
For the Bible tells me so."

What was Anna Bartlett Warner smoking? The silly woman then went on to claim that a sickly, Godless, UnSaved child will be fast-tracked to Heaven when it turns its tiny toes up and expires.

I very much look forward to getting to know you better.

YiC
JL-V

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

My favorite Bible passage is the one in Hosea about "They that sow the wind reap the whirlwind" - its Truth is absolute proof that there's no such thing as anthropogenic climate change.

Thank you for an introduction and for a lovely choice of Scripture.

Whether or not anthropogenes produce climate variations we know, because God has told us, that catastrophic "symptoms" as predicted by purveyors of "alternative fuels" cannot occur.
Jeremiah 5:22

Jeremiah 5
21 Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not:
22 Fear ye not me? saith the LORD: will ye not tremble at my presence, which have placed the sand for the bound of the sea by a perpetual decree, that it cannot pass it: and though the waves thereof toss themselves, yet can they not prevail; though they roar, yet can they not pass over it?
23 But this people hath a revolting and a rebellious heart; they are revolted and gone.

God knew that people would be contradicting Him before long. He did not need to say by a perpetual decree, He could have just said “placed the sand for the bound of the sea by a decree” but He wanted to make sure we understood about sea levels. Thank you for highlighting this important aspect of God's explanation about the world He made for us to live in.

Welcome to the forum.

[Dana723]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Hello there, Sister Menace, and welcome! How many stolid Christian boys have you born for your husband? I have five fine strapping clean-limbed boys all in the service for Our King!

[Minace]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Many thanks for the warm welcome, folks!

I'd first like to say that my near atheism is something I fully intend to shed with your help. Know that its burden was only heaped upon me by the unfortunate circumstance of my birth to Godless Anglican parents. And for that I pray that they, and the whole of their acursed communion worldwide, die millions of agonizing deaths and suffer unbearable torment in the flames of Hell for ever.

So, as you can imagine, I had a deprived childhood. Brother Larry, the formative experience of a mass shooting at my school was denied to me, and neither did the waters of Flint pass my lips. Luckily as it turns out, for at that time God would have excluded me from His protection, as He does, I hope, for all members of my God-forsaken former church.

Dana723, you are indeed blessed, but I fear the nature of your blessing has blinded you to my situation. In my adulthood I am faced with only the most pathetic of Anglican males as potential husbands. Wimps every one! There was absolutely no way I was ever going to permit one of those - I shudder to call them "men" - plow my furrow and shoot his God-denying seed into my uncomely place. But now I've found a church more - how shall I put it? - more engorged with vigor, who knows what may happen?

[Johny Joe Hold]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Your former Anglican church could not help you the way we can. We here at Landover Baptist are experts in sin. We spend much of our time rooting out sin, holding up high for others to see and condemning it.

Toward that end, you might wish to discuss your own sin and how we could help you leave it behind.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

I'd first like to say that my near atheism is something I fully intend to shed with your help.

I know that King Henry threw off the shackles of Rome and that his daughter cemented in Biblical doctrines while simultaneously avoiding Lutheran heresies. Apparently something similar was going on in Scotland. But assuming that by "near atheism" you're referring to the current position of the Church of England in all its forms, what on earth went wrong? How did the reforms become unravelled?

Then, by rejecting the false Latin texts and basing everything on what God explains (and commands us to do) in The Bible, by accepting what Jesus said and by following His teachings, it was easy to see the gross travesty of Rome and all the other heresies.

Now, it seems as though in every way they're determined to do pretty much the exact opposite of what The Bible teaches and to deny the historical record preserved for us.

Regardless of where they get their new dogma from, what happened between then and now to change things so horribly?

[Minace]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Mitza,

Theology and history do not run in parallel. Henry threw off only those Roman shackles necessary for his political and dynastic purposes. His church retained its Roman Catholic foundations. However, his reforms opened the door into England of a faith closer to the Truth, something that was not his intention. Neither was it the intention of his successors, Ted, Mary, Betty and the Scottish Jim. So my answer to your question is nothing went wrong from the Anglican perspective. The reforms did not unravel because they were not theological but rather political. Henry rejected virtually none of the Latin heresies other than the Pope's authority.

Why on Earth do you think our forefathers fled England? The church from which I myself flee is Catholic in its fundamentals.

I have a question for you. Do you think I am English?

Answer, and then know that I am. I confess I am. I tried to use American English in my posts as required by this forum, but have evidently failed to disguise my damnable use of English English.

Forgive me.

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Mitza,

Theology and history do not run in parallel. Henry threw off only those Roman shackles necessary for his political and dynastic purposes. His church retained its Roman Catholic foundations. However, his reforms opened the door into England of a faith closer to the Truth, something that was not his intention. Neither was it the intention of his successors, Ted, Mary, Betty and the Scottish Jim. So my answer to your question is nothing went wrong from the Anglican perspective. The reforms did not unravel because they were not theological but rather political. Henry rejected virtually none of the Latin heresies other than the Pope's authority.

Why on Earth do you think our forefathers fled England? The church from which I myself flee is Catholic in its fundamentals.

I have a question for you. Do you think I am English?

Answer, and then know that I am. I confess I am. I tried to use American English in my posts as required by this forum, but have evidently failed to disguise my damnable use of English English.

Forgive me.

You can always argue the finer points here, was it theology, there were some reforms, was it political and dynastic - but those are all minor points, like arguing whether chlorinated chicken is good for you or not.

Two things stand out - England separated from the corrupt pope and deprived him of his filthy lucre, and the Holy Spirit inspired the King James Bible (1611) - setting forth the uncorrupted Word of God for all today's True Christians™.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: I need a real church, one that isn't atheist

Theology and history do not run in parallel.

Thank you for replying. It depends on how one defines theology. For example, any utterance of a quack theologian could be thought of as theology by someone while for someone else Theology signifies understanding -ology of what God Theo- has communicated. That communication is preserved in the historical record so in that context Theology and History are parallel.

II John 1
7 Many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

The Word by which God communicates His information is inseparable from God Himself just as, without Him, comprehending the information recorded for us is impossible. Nevertheless by disregarding The Word an account becomes payable which can only be settled by Christ.

Then, by rejecting the false Latin texts and basing everything on what God explains (and commands us to do) in The Bible, by accepting what Jesus said and by following His teachings, it was easy to see the gross travesty of Rome and all the other heresies.

I was not referring to Kings or Queens exclusively (whether reformist or otherwise) but for anyone basing their world view on what God explains, who accepts what Jesus said and follows His teachings, it's easy to see the gross travesty of Rome and all the other heresies. What archbishops may pronounce is utterly irrelevant. If they abide in the doctrine of Christ they will not disagree with God's information preserved for us in the historical record. If they do disagree with God then obviously they are transgressors and not worth listening to.

There is a third peripheral category, just worth a mention. People who disagree with God and claim to be heathens. But for anyone able to read The Bible there's no reason to listen to any of them. Stepping out from false dogma and generations of deception is necessary to appreciate reality and if as you say a door was opened for a faith closer to The Truth (whatever King Henry intended, and I agree that his motives were more fleshly than theological) the thing that went wrong was where that doorway led to. Not what meretricious theologians of the day intended or even dared to hope for in their wildest dreams.