This is actually a really succinct and useful message. It really is that simple. The left took the school boards by being the only ones that showed up.
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
20 comments:
13
1 month ago
13 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+13Score on mirror
)
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
Yes. This is the main disconnect and the issue i have with most religious people… they don’t see the importance in taking real action.
Too many Christians refuse to read what the Bible actually says. They think they can say a few prayers and smile and be saved.
Jesus told the parable of the two sons. One son said he would be out to help his father in his field and never showed up. The other said he would not, but later repented and went out to help. Which son was the faithful one?
Simple messages like these are so blindingly obvious in the Bible but apparently esoteric to modern, main-stream "Christians".
Jesus told the parable of the two sons. One son said he would be out to help his father in his field and never showed up. The other said he would not, but later repented and went out to help. Which son was the faithful one?
Simple messages like these are so blindingly obvious in the Bible but apparently esoteric to modern, main-stream "Christians".
>You show up
>With your friends
Good idea. I'll head over to the friends store later today and pick some up.
>With your friends
Good idea. I'll head over to the friends store later today and pick some up.
That's not a Church, that's a Synagogue. Based, when churches only preach what feels good, That God is Love and He accepts whatever they do they're really worshipping satan. From watching Trump get sworn in, I saw that female bishop said "Be nice to faggots, Evil mean Trump" and thought the Word of God definitely doesn't get taught in her synagogue
So, have you, M17BZ3W, taken over your church yet?
Let us know how that is going.
Let us know how that is going.
Or just be Orthodox and not have to change much of anything and enjoy a good relationship with God.
I mean, I don't wanna rain on this too hard, because I like the spirit. It could be worth trying, maybe. But my gut reaction would be to not get overly optimistic about this being successful on any meaningful scale, because...
> Church Corporation X
...Churches are just that. Corporations. With hierarchies connecting every one of their branches to one national conglomerate (yes, that includes "non-denominational" churches and the like.) In many cases, you're probably not going to have much more luck taking over a church than you would your local Walmart. Unless it's a really small parish in a less populated area, you're only going to get so far up the ladder before you get checked by an upper level line-tower.
And as other posters mentioned:
1) How many people really have a large enough friend circle to pull off something like this, let alone one that is based? Acquiring that is a monumental task all in itself.
2) The strength of this proposal is riding on the back of receipts. Have you successfully done this in your own church, or do you at least personally know someone who has?
> Church Corporation X
...Churches are just that. Corporations. With hierarchies connecting every one of their branches to one national conglomerate (yes, that includes "non-denominational" churches and the like.) In many cases, you're probably not going to have much more luck taking over a church than you would your local Walmart. Unless it's a really small parish in a less populated area, you're only going to get so far up the ladder before you get checked by an upper level line-tower.
And as other posters mentioned:
1) How many people really have a large enough friend circle to pull off something like this, let alone one that is based? Acquiring that is a monumental task all in itself.
2) The strength of this proposal is riding on the back of receipts. Have you successfully done this in your own church, or do you at least personally know someone who has?
> how many people
Doesn't matter. Their numbers are rapidly declining. If you show up and get your friends and neighbors to show up -- you win. Keep showing up. Don't donate a penny to the liberals. Make sure any money you do donate goes to things that you actually support.
> have I done this in my church?
I belong to the LDS church, and yes, showing up every week means I hold leadership positions. One of the things I have to do is make sure we're actually teaching the doctrine rather than whatever the latest pop culture fad is. Our church president recently explicitly mandated that transgenderism be quashed from our ranks (because too many liberals were not getting the memo), which was the position I held and most others, and we made sure the trannies didn't take anything from us. Never once did we ever surrender.
> do I know someone who has?
Yes, it is happening all across the protestant world today. There are coordinated efforts to get conservatives (actual conservatives) back to church so they can take leadership positions.
In the last town I lived in, I was pretty close to a lot of the protestants via the Republican Party. About half of the churches had good conservative leadership BECAUSE conservatives kept going to churches. I knew several people who would probably be considered "lay" but who had a great deal of influence on who was allowed to preach what and church budget stuff. The other half of the churches were dying, and they didn't have much property to speak of, so it wasn't worth the effort to take them over. The house I lived in was built on land that used to be owned by a popular church back in the 1950s. The congregation got old, died off, and the kids went to to other churches. So they sold the assets.
Here in rural Texas, I watched the methodists split over the issue of gays. Most of the people wanted to make sure gays could never infiltrate the methodist church, but because the national leadership was obviously going a different direction, they left and took the church building with them. The liberals were left holding the umbrellas. I know a guy who was basically fired as a minister because he held liberal positions on gays and trannies. Why? Because the congregation wanted none of it, so they got together and complained.
Even the catholics are run by volunteers. While it will take a generation or two to reclaim the priesthood there, you can do a ton just as a volunteer. Those volunteers determine a lot more than you realize, which is why they are so heavily infiltrated by jews.
Show up to your granny's church. Find out how it operates. Read the charters. They will basically tell you what you need to do. Most churches already have very strict rules against liberalism, and all it takes is someone to raise their hand and formally complain.
Doesn't matter. Their numbers are rapidly declining. If you show up and get your friends and neighbors to show up -- you win. Keep showing up. Don't donate a penny to the liberals. Make sure any money you do donate goes to things that you actually support.
> have I done this in my church?
I belong to the LDS church, and yes, showing up every week means I hold leadership positions. One of the things I have to do is make sure we're actually teaching the doctrine rather than whatever the latest pop culture fad is. Our church president recently explicitly mandated that transgenderism be quashed from our ranks (because too many liberals were not getting the memo), which was the position I held and most others, and we made sure the trannies didn't take anything from us. Never once did we ever surrender.
> do I know someone who has?
Yes, it is happening all across the protestant world today. There are coordinated efforts to get conservatives (actual conservatives) back to church so they can take leadership positions.
In the last town I lived in, I was pretty close to a lot of the protestants via the Republican Party. About half of the churches had good conservative leadership BECAUSE conservatives kept going to churches. I knew several people who would probably be considered "lay" but who had a great deal of influence on who was allowed to preach what and church budget stuff. The other half of the churches were dying, and they didn't have much property to speak of, so it wasn't worth the effort to take them over. The house I lived in was built on land that used to be owned by a popular church back in the 1950s. The congregation got old, died off, and the kids went to to other churches. So they sold the assets.
Here in rural Texas, I watched the methodists split over the issue of gays. Most of the people wanted to make sure gays could never infiltrate the methodist church, but because the national leadership was obviously going a different direction, they left and took the church building with them. The liberals were left holding the umbrellas. I know a guy who was basically fired as a minister because he held liberal positions on gays and trannies. Why? Because the congregation wanted none of it, so they got together and complained.
Even the catholics are run by volunteers. While it will take a generation or two to reclaim the priesthood there, you can do a ton just as a volunteer. Those volunteers determine a lot more than you realize, which is why they are so heavily infiltrated by jews.
Show up to your granny's church. Find out how it operates. Read the charters. They will basically tell you what you need to do. Most churches already have very strict rules against liberalism, and all it takes is someone to raise their hand and formally complain.
Well, I definitely endorse the trying it, even if I am blackpilled overall. Doing something is better than nothing.
I myself am non-religious, but a regular churchgoer under a religious pretense. I have been considering hopping onto their church government panel just to try and counter subvert them with based theology.
I'm just one man, but perhaps I shall...
I myself am non-religious, but a regular churchgoer under a religious pretense. I have been considering hopping onto their church government panel just to try and counter subvert them with based theology.
I'm just one man, but perhaps I shall...
I know a lot of "non-religious" people who think organized religion is evil. I can't speak for you, but I can speak about what I thought of their philosophy.
In times past, such people would've gone to church for a variety of reasons. Among them were the benefits to your social standing and also because the church formed part of your power base. In other words, they were using the church as much as the church was using them. It was a quid-pro-quo.
Now, obviously hypocrisy is bad, bad stuff in Christianity, but what is hypocrisy? It is PRETENDING to be something you are not, or to believe something you do not. As such, there is literally no quarrel any Christian should have with someone who shows up to church but doesn't accept every little thing the church teaches.
That said, what you mean by "non-religious" is probably something that can be translated to: "I am a true follower of Christ (the God of Truth) and not a follower of the false christ many churches teach." If that is the case, and I encourage you to compare your philosophy with what Christ and his disciples actually taught as opposed to what people say he taught -- then you should be welcome in any church. You just have to stick to your guns and read the Bible for yourself, which is pretty much what every church claims they want their membership to do.
In times past, such people would've gone to church for a variety of reasons. Among them were the benefits to your social standing and also because the church formed part of your power base. In other words, they were using the church as much as the church was using them. It was a quid-pro-quo.
Now, obviously hypocrisy is bad, bad stuff in Christianity, but what is hypocrisy? It is PRETENDING to be something you are not, or to believe something you do not. As such, there is literally no quarrel any Christian should have with someone who shows up to church but doesn't accept every little thing the church teaches.
That said, what you mean by "non-religious" is probably something that can be translated to: "I am a true follower of Christ (the God of Truth) and not a follower of the false christ many churches teach." If that is the case, and I encourage you to compare your philosophy with what Christ and his disciples actually taught as opposed to what people say he taught -- then you should be welcome in any church. You just have to stick to your guns and read the Bible for yourself, which is pretty much what every church claims they want their membership to do.
> I know a lot of "non-religious" people who think organized religion is evil. I can't speak for you, but I can speak about what I thought of their philosophy.
I think religion is inevitable. To seek God is to be human. Even the most subhuman of all races throughout time had some sort of religion, even if it was backwater demon worship.
Saying organized religion is evil to me is like saying, "government is evil." It's not. Inherently, it is something morally neutral (and necessary to have,) but it is functionally evil far more often than it is ever good on account of how human beings execute it.
> That said, what you mean by "non-religious" is probably something that can be translated to: "I am a true follower of Christ (the God of Truth) and not a follower of the false christ many churches teach." If that is the case, and I encourage you to compare your philosophy with what Christ and his disciples actually taught as opposed to what people say he taught -- then you should be welcome in any church. You just have to stick to your guns and read the Bible for yourself, which is pretty much what every church claims they want their membership to do.
This is always the prickly point. I am truly non-religious, but not atheistic. I consider myself simply a Theist. God exists, and has some level of active participation in our existence. Beyond that, it is impossible to know with any meaningful level of specificity what that means. Though, I would say indeed that my god's name is Truth.
I'm completely agnostic on whether or not Jesus Christ was a real historical figure, a wholesale mythological character, or some combination of the two, but I definitely don't agree with all his teachings. I agree when he leans into stoicism, detachment from the material, but I discard the suicidal empathy stuff as false (love your enemy, turn the other cheek... even The Good Samaritan is a dysfunctional teaching.)
And I don't believe I'm misinterpreting these teachings. I've read the entire New Testament through multiple times, almost certainly more than a large number of Christians. I do honestly believe the leftists/cuckservatives have a more honest reading of Christ's words without abstracting them over the right wingers in a significant number of instances.
But I attend Church under the pretense of being Christian so that I can expect meaningful reciprocity for my participation in their community (if they don't see you as "inside," then you are extremely limited in what you can do there or what you can get out of it.)
I think religion is inevitable. To seek God is to be human. Even the most subhuman of all races throughout time had some sort of religion, even if it was backwater demon worship.
Saying organized religion is evil to me is like saying, "government is evil." It's not. Inherently, it is something morally neutral (and necessary to have,) but it is functionally evil far more often than it is ever good on account of how human beings execute it.
> That said, what you mean by "non-religious" is probably something that can be translated to: "I am a true follower of Christ (the God of Truth) and not a follower of the false christ many churches teach." If that is the case, and I encourage you to compare your philosophy with what Christ and his disciples actually taught as opposed to what people say he taught -- then you should be welcome in any church. You just have to stick to your guns and read the Bible for yourself, which is pretty much what every church claims they want their membership to do.
This is always the prickly point. I am truly non-religious, but not atheistic. I consider myself simply a Theist. God exists, and has some level of active participation in our existence. Beyond that, it is impossible to know with any meaningful level of specificity what that means. Though, I would say indeed that my god's name is Truth.
I'm completely agnostic on whether or not Jesus Christ was a real historical figure, a wholesale mythological character, or some combination of the two, but I definitely don't agree with all his teachings. I agree when he leans into stoicism, detachment from the material, but I discard the suicidal empathy stuff as false (love your enemy, turn the other cheek... even The Good Samaritan is a dysfunctional teaching.)
And I don't believe I'm misinterpreting these teachings. I've read the entire New Testament through multiple times, almost certainly more than a large number of Christians. I do honestly believe the leftists/cuckservatives have a more honest reading of Christ's words without abstracting them over the right wingers in a significant number of instances.
But I attend Church under the pretense of being Christian so that I can expect meaningful reciprocity for my participation in their community (if they don't see you as "inside," then you are extremely limited in what you can do there or what you can get out of it.)
Toast message