The following comments are adapted from a recent posting by "Ripley"
In 1974 dozens of WCG ministers left over a number of points of disagreement. Sweeping excommunications followed, after which they formed the Associated Churches of God. It was the clear position of HWA, GTA and the WCG that the Associated Churches were not part of the "true church."
Ironically, four years later Garner Ted was disfellowshipped and subsequently founded the Church of God, International. He was marked. Members were to have no fellowship with him. It was clearly the position of his father and the WCG that he was not part of the "true church." Those ministers who chose to affiliate with GTA at that time or in the intervening years were not true ministers.
But today, ministers from those organizations would be viewed by most in the various COG organizations as brothers and fellow Sabbath-keeping Christians.
Why? What changed? How did they go from anathema to approved?
The fact is, the basis for no longer being part of the true church was no longer being in step with Herbert W. Armstrong. That's it. Nothing else.
Clearly, there were people who came to a knowledge of the Sabbath and other doctrines through the Associated Churches, and the Church of God, International; were baptized; and began worshipping entirely through those churches, having had nothing to do with the WCG. Presumably, the same thing occurred in various other of the "heretical" offshoots of that era.
But it didn't matter. They were not in step with HWA, so they were heretics. "Proofs" were trotted out to show how this was true. They were not part of the "true church."
Yet today they are! Sure, Flurry doesn't think so, and neither do Pack and a few others. But, by and large, they're considered part of the fold. Look at Ron Dart. He went with GTA, then on his own. But he's OK today, even downright popular.
It's all indicative of an ever-shifting set of principles, changed as needed to "prove" whatever is most convenient at the time. "Nothing has changed," we hear, while in fact just about everything has. And then, the ever-present beaut: "It doesn't matter what HWA did...."
It's exhausting. It's sad. It's unpredictable. It's inconsistent. And yet, adherents insist it's somehow "right," while never being able to pin the tail on the Correctness donkey.
Which means that those who disagree, including many AW readers, can only be viewed as wrong. Case closed. Ha, ha. "You lose." Bible says so.
It gets so ridiculous. "Nyah-nyah-nyah" is not an adequate substitute for genuine credibility or consistency.
40 comments:
by chance do you reside near the land down under?
http://www.tinkerddb.net/LandDownUnder/
All:
Even the Church of God 7th Day, which for many years had to labor under the title "The Sardis Church" has a new image, life and vigor amongst the descendants of the WCG.
What is very ironic to me, is the fact that COG7th Day is actually LARGER (especially if you count the international arean) in terms of membership than ALL of the combined legacy of the WCG !!
Pretty good performance for a church that is supposed to be "DEAD" and yet now appears to be "ALIVE" and doing quite fine.
The so called "Philadelphians", ie, the descendants of WCG have devolved into a fighting and bickering bunch who exhibit little of "brotherly love" and Christian goodwill towards one another.
You live long enough and you see some interesting twists of fate and irony. I cant wait for the movie "Church of God", everything you would want in a movie,...murder, malice, mayhem, sex, money, intrigue. We would have to tone it down to get an "R" rating tho!
I would cast John Travolta in the role of the younger GTA, but use Larry Hagman for the older GTA roles.
Luv
Lussenheide
If I remember correctly, HWA was himself baptised by a baptist minister.
Tho with the LCG myself, this article correctly identifies the ultimate need to follow Christ rather than any particular "work" or any particular human induvidual.
And life is complicated, and things are often less clear than we would like it to be.
Given the inconsistencies in the narcissistic ministry of Herbert Armstrong [just why was Pentecost changed?], it is clear that the whole reason for the Radio Church of God and the Worldwide Church of God was so that Herbert Armstrong himself -- and no one else -- would have extended choices to be held selfishly so he could live the life that he chose without any restrictions from the groups with which he was originally associated. He wanted to be completely free from anyone else's control and make up his own mind and make his own choices.
The short version: He was rebellious. From there he founded his own heresy from the Church of God Seventh Day based upon British Israelism, a thoroughly discredited belief. He went on to enslave others and make his choices for other people.
Those who followed after, for the most part, are liars who know they are liars. Particularly this is the case with Roderick Meredith who blatantly lied to his own congregations. Just one such lie was that he would abide by the board's decision -- a statement in Kansas City in front of at least 666 people in Global. He went on to deliberately break his covenant and the bank. Nobody should trust this man. He has adopted the evil lifestyle of Herbert Armstrong to seek freedom of choice for himself and enslave others.
Those who have known RM know of his continuing lies, deceptions and cover ups. He'd tell his inner circle in the back room things that contradicted what he said out front even to his own ministers.
We have others besides Meredith, such a Pack and Flurry, who are abject liars and know they are.
If anyone is looking to Scripture for their pattern of life, there is a command to "from such turn away".
It is time to put away the idolatry of worshiping the liars and the false prophets, particularly with the Passover being only one day away. Examine yourself as a reprobate to determine that you have not the faith of Jesus nor of the Apostles, if, that is, is important to you and you believe Scripture and want to trash your golden calf.
How's that for heresy?
Note to the Dense: This is irony and satire with smatterings of disturbing truth, not suitable for children under the age of 13 nor for people who aren't particularly bright.
Those who followed after, for the most part, are liars who know they are liars. Particularly this is the case with Roderick Meredith who blatantly lied to his own congregations. Just one such lie was that he would abide by the board's decision -- a statement in Kansas City in front of at least 666 people in Global.
_____________________
Did he lie, or did he just change his mind afterwards? If he did lie, that would be inappropriate (tho not as inappropriate as the lies told by Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Peter, and many others).
While these lines of attack may be pleasing to the anti-RCM crowd, they hardly amount to anything.
Whatever happened to the Associated Churches of God?
Well, at least they got the ball rolling. Anyone remember all those ministers being called back for a "sabbatical" at that time?
Scared the hell out of ole Herbie, didn't it? People leaving "the church" in droves that way and taking their (gasp) tithes elsewhere, heh heh heh.
Herbert W. Armstrong was always informed by numerology. He was forever finding significance in numbers, contrived or otherwise, as they related to "the work". Threes, sevens, twelves, nineteens, all seemed to have great prominence in the R/WCG.
Well, as John Lennon always said, "Here's another clue for you all!" Faithful Armstrongites are guided by the so-called "18 Restored Truths". Let's contemplate that number for a moment. A gambler would probably immediately recognize 18 as being the sum of 7 and 11, the winning numbers in a game of "craps". So, the initial clue would be that getting involved in Armstrongism is a really dicey proposition.
However, this number has a much more sinister significance. 18 is three times six! Or, 6 + 6 + 6. Or 666. So you might say that Herbert W. Armstrong has left his followers stamped with the mark of the beast, in such a subtle manner that they don't even realize it!
BB
Anonymous said...
Given the inconsistencies in the narcissistic ministry of Herbert Armstrong [just why was Pentecost changed?],
My Comment: Herbie STILL got it wrong, but his followers still keep it on Sunday. Follow that man!
Steve K
Corky said...
Scared the hell out of ole Herbie, didn't it? People leaving "the church" in droves that way and taking their (gasp) tithes elsewhere, heh heh heh.
My Comment: It didn't seem to put a dent in the "work". Herbie just drained the rest of us that were left by asking for more and more, but more never seemed to be enough for him. He died with a happy wallet. I wonder if he took any of it with him?
Steve K
just why was Pentecost changed?
_______________________
Ultra boring topic for I suspect just about everybody who isn't fascinated by the obscuranties of Hebrew words and phrases, but for whoever actually cares, enter into a search engine
herbert armstrong pentecost monday
and there will be a bunch of stuff to check out.
Northerner said... Did he lie, or did he just change his mind afterwards? If he did lie, that would be inappropriate (tho not as inappropriate as the lies told by Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Peter, and many others).
My Comment: I don't think they were habitual liars though.
Steve K
I disagree. With just a little bible reading, it is clear to see that Abraham, Jabob and Peter were in fact habitual liars.
The Skeptic said...
I disagree. With just a little bible reading, it is clear to see that Abraham, Jabob and Peter were in fact habitual liars.
My Comment: Hmmmm. Could be. I wonder why it is so difficult to tell the truth?
Steve K
anonymous said...
We have others besides Meredith, such as Pack and Flurry, who are abject liars and know they are.
My Comment; Uh, let's not leave out the big Gurus in UCG.
Steve K
"Did he lie, or did he just change his mind afterwards? If he did lie, that would be inappropriate (tho not as inappropriate as the lies told by Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Peter, and many others)."
An oft used ploy. When all else fails, find a Bible Guy who sinned and hide behind "see he did and we do, soooooooo forgive us." Even better yet, say stuff like "Why the greatest men in the Bible were some of the greatest sinners." (This is true). It's the "Therefore..." that follows that provides the cope out and justification to keep on with it all and not be accountable for human stupidity in the hands of God chosen ones...
The Bible guys were probably just as big a jerk in reality as all the rest of us poor humans. Their ain't no 10's and those that think they are can't add. We have an image in our heads of how we think the Bible Boys were, and that alone should tell us how terribly wrong we probably are.
One rule of good Bible study is that whoever or even whatever the Bible condemns or says are the evil bastards to avoid (Egyptians, Pharisees etc) are probably people you'd really like. The ones promoted as the good guys, maybe not so much in reality.
A.. says
An oft used ploy. When all else fails, find a Bible Guy who sinned and hide behind "see he did and we do, soooooooo forgive us."
_______________________
Personally I don't concede that RCM lied, but rather changed his mind on this matter. Further, when personal weaknesses are shown, I have no expectation of utter human perfection. I certainly am not perfect.
But I understand that it is as psychologically important to anti-CoG-ites to regard CoG ministers as non-stop liars and criminals of every sort as it is for the anti-Bush people to regard President Bush as some sort of Hitlerite supercriminal, and I realize that isn't going to change, and ultimately it is not my intention to persuade anyone to a contrary view on this forum.
Merely know that these weak rants are unimpressive to those of us in the CoGs.
"But I understand that it is as psychologically important to anti-CoG-ites to regard CoG ministers as non-stop liars and criminals of every sort as it is for the anti-Bush people to regard President Bush as some sort of Hitlerite supercriminal, and I realize that isn't going to change, and ultimately it is not my intention to persuade anyone to a contrary view on this forum."
It would be nice if the COG'ers here would stop putting us no-longer-COG'ers into one convenient basket. Please do not assume that, since we no longer are on board your particular ship, that we all think in some sort of ranting lockstep of full-steam condemnations. We take various positions, and do not necessarly assume that all COG ministers are "non-stop liars and criminals". There is little doubt than a number are, although I doubt the percentage of such is as high as it was back in the old WCG. Our primary complaint is with the too-often abuse of authority that is practiced by too many COG ministers, including the assumption that the interpretation of truth comes out of their mouths. It doesn't matter how "lying" or "criminal" any of them are (or the president, for that matter); what matters the most is the actions that they take, the arrogant assumptions that they make, and the resulting willingness of lay members to stop questioning. I know that you disagree with that analysis, and that's fine. But the primary motivations of most of us ex-COG'ers here is a desire to help individuals to start truly thinking for themselves. Again: doesn't matter about crimes and lies so much as asserted monopolization of "truth".
I don't think it's a question, to me at least, of sincerity. I never had an insincere day in my life in WCG. I really thought I was in the most accurate Biblical version of Christianity. Unless you were dragged kicking and screaming into a COG experience, it just seemed more right. I know, as much as I regret the experience and choice now, I had to be there. Had somone tried to talk me out of it, I would have dug in deeper thinking Satan himself was trying to take the truth away from me.
What I never saw and still don't see, save for WCG which has simply reinvented the wheel of evangelical foolishness and they have yet to figure that out, is any hint that there is always more to learn and the whole story they think they have is not the whole story that is. Let's face it, no one has the whole story and we'd probably pass out if we knew it. But its fun lookin'.
Everyone is entitled to believe whatever they wish and to be wherever their heart leads them. It is not up to us to scorn or mock anyone. Everyone is where they are when they are there. I suppose, "you in your small corner and I in mine" would describe it.
Some here only know how to respond with sweeping generalities as to how something is or was or what motive someone they probably never knew personally had or has. It's a waste of time. All ministers weren't evil and all members weren't the innocent victims. People allow what they allow until they don't. But so often, once we don't, we act as if we never did. That's just not accurate. It takes a long time to admit that something meant to inspire and engender hope was neither inspiring nor hopeful after all. It's also painful and most of the rancor and smartass approach is rooted in that pain.
Anyway, twood be nice if AW was a place to share learning of that which we didn't know in the past and have learned along the way.
The most successful and oft commented on postings are always those where we have yet another chance to mock, tell war stories, impute motives, or proclaim how it all was or is, sometimes correctly and sometimes thinking what one sees in hindsite was the secret reason from the start. It's easy to fill in the spaces in hindsite and come up exaggerating intent. Mostly it's bumbling more than plotting. Some of us are so predictable in our responses, they all sound the same no matter what the topic.
I don't want this COG experience to suck the life out me forever. It's taken enough already and I'm sure it was a factor in shortening the lives of some friends who never could process the whole mess.
Northerner wrote: "Further, when personal weaknesses are shown, I have no expectation of utter human perfection."
I recall that for thirty years that I carefully nurtured a state of denial about Armstrongism by appealing to the idea that "nobody's perfect." In my mind the WCG was God's one and only true Church but it just had a few wrinkles and that these wrinkles would eventually be smoothed out.
But I should have thought more deeply. There was no growth happening. No problems being resolved. Just the same old dish of authoritarianism, legalism and phariseeism served up daily. There was a persistent, consistent pattern of abusive behavior. It was a structural problem not just a collection of remediable isolated events.
HWA used to say words to the effect that "God's Church is willing to change." It might change regarding a few small things inside larger erroneous principles, but on the whole Armstrongism is today what it was in 1939.
One of the experiences I had as an Armstrongnite that convinced me that Armstrongism was not Christian was eating in Faculty Dining at Big Sandy. I ate there for a year. I could have eaten there a lot more than I did. I can think of no more toxic environment. The smarmy, self-congratulation of "leaders" pre-occupied with their own position would be an awakening to the average lay member at the time. Each time I went there, it was like stepping into an abyss of pride and arrogance. The dearth of anything that even seemed like love was conspicuous. Oddly, there were many who thrived on this unholy environment and seemed not to be able to even detect how dysfunctional it was. But this was Armstrongism in practice.
Was this obvious lack of the influence of the Holy Spirit in Faculty Dining a mere problem to be overcome? Or was this problem one of many eruptions from a corrupt substrate? Experience and history demonstrates that it was the latter.
-- Neo
it appears to me that the main problem is that so many people see WCG as a human endevor, something created by HWA....so they looked to HWA to guide them in all things....
God's Church is still around... some of the members have never heard of HWA or WCG....and some, like me, have never been in WCG...
our focus has never been on any paticular human being in the Church, but on God the Father & Jesus.......therefore we are not injured by the shortcomings of the leadership, because we know that they are mere humans too.
we follow them as they follow Jesus, and ignore any errors they teach, praying for them that they will grow in grace and truth like everyone else, for they are simply trying to do what is right and gain entry to the Kingdom.
yes, the wheat and the tares grow up together, but that's not for us to worry with, God will take care of the sorting....
Stunningly succinct summary suitable for students of society.
To be HWA or not to be, that is the question. Tis it nobler to have an original religious idea, or plagiarize another?
With all of the usual anti-Armstrongist blather posted here by the "We hate HWA" crowd, you would think that one of them at least would read this for what is really saying.
Basically, the so-called Armstrongites are quite capable of thinking for themselves whether they hold to many or few of his overall teachings. Now that he is gone the threats of people leaving has become a reality and many found that it was not that bad on the outside.
What this does show, above all, is that CoG people first look our similarities and then our differences. It really shows that in many ways we are in a very exciting brethren, I really mean it.
Northerner said . . . .
"Personally I don't concede that RCM lied, but rather changed his mind on this matter. Further, when personal weaknesses are shown, I have no expectation of utter human perfection. I certainly am not perfect."
How do you know that you are not perfect? When it comes to a human being, what constitutes "perfect"?
Is your "weakness" really a
weakness or what someone else has said is a weakness?
Are they "perfect" enough to judge a "weakness" in you? How are they more "perfect" than you?
brave anonymous poster said...
it appears to me that the main problem is that so many people see WCG as a human endevor, something created by HWA....so they looked to HWA to guide them in all things....
God's Church is still around... some of the members have never heard of HWA or WCG....and some, like me, have never been in WCG...
Actually the problem with the Armstrongism (and there really is no other word for it that fits) is that too many DIDN'T and still DON'T see it as a human endeavor.
I CRINGE when people try to blame God for that mess and that theology. God is not a monster.
yes, the wheat and the tares grow up together, but that's not for us to worry with, God will take care of the sorting....
Funny...I didn't recall any of us calling you a tare (an unwanted poisonous weed), nor do I wish to wash my hands of you and ask that God sort you out.
All I pray for is that you find the clarity of mind to see it for what it is. Once the fog lifts, you begin to see true spirituality and begin to get a clue about God.
Could we pleeeezeee quit lumping the ACOGs in with the legitimate COGs out there? I have no lost love for either group. But the COGs (the Seventh-day Church of God and other small, Sunday keeping local Churches of God, e.g. the Podunk-ville COG) have little, if anything, in common with the House that Herbert built - the Armstrong Church of God.
And all of the Herbster's daughter churches, the now 300+ ACOGs, have little, if anything, in common with the long ago established COGs. In fact, it's debatable here to even dignify the ACOGs with the word "God" at all, since they certainly don't represent anything more than the twisted mish-mash of Armstrongology the old coot cobbled together from whatever doctrines from other churches tickled his money making fancy. God making Mormonism, Jewish festivals, Catholic hierarchal org structure (with Pope Herbert the Only at the top), white supremacist British Israelism, whatever.
So please, all you LCG, RCG, UCG, CGI, ACG, GGGers out there -- don't forget to put that capital A in front of your org's name, where it belongs as an identifying mark that correctly tags all of you as Armstrongologists, and not members of any legitimate Church of God.
Did he lie, or did he just change his mind afterwards? If he did lie, that would be inappropriate (tho not as inappropriate as the lies told by Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Peter, and many others).
OK, then. He broke his promise.
Merely know that these weak rants are unimpressive to those of us in the CoGs.
Maybe liars as such -- being in the spirit of Satan the Devil -- aren't so bad, but as false prophets they sure are.
It's quite interesting to find that apologists are finding inventive ways of making excuses for their fave idol and using Scripture to do it to boot.
Excuses, excuses....
WCG was the result of an imperfect man trying to follow God's direction.....Herbert didn't get it all right the first time, or the second time, or the third...and some things he never did get right, but he kept on trying....(the same thing can be said about any Church member)
there are people who like to latch onto every mistake HWA made, and try to use them to discredit God's instructions to mankind.......well, I'd hate to think that the validity of the bible was dependant upon how well I followed it's instructions.
thankfully, Jesus did obey the law perfectly, and became a worthy sacrifice for the rest of us....He knows who the Father has called into the Church, and He knows whether or not we are truly trying to follow His instructions, and He is more than willing to make up the distance that we fall short of.
eventually, every human being that has ever lived will have the same opportunity that those in His Church have had, and are having....those that reject Him and His way, with full knowledge of what they are doing, are the tares, and God will separate us from them.....but that event is still a good way off into the future.
it's hard for me to comprehend how people can be so offended by that......it's not HWA's teaching, it's what God, in His written word the bible, tells us will happen....HWA was simply one in a long line of humans that have taught this.
I pray that everyone have a most reflective, meaningful passover as we commemorate our Lord's sacrifice.
Since when have the brethren who weren`t from wcg or their children ever been considered apart of the churches that stayed with HWA ????
The are some storms in life that can never be weathered.
The person who wrote it must be living in the clouds.
Yes refugees from those 1970`s heretic churches do survive in the various churches but not without the odd comment or the odd mini "spanish inquisition" moment of questioning.
Its a mini miracles that they do survive, but it aint no easy ride. Any skills or talents they may have are never gonna be discovered.
The ministry do not have the same interest in you when you are a refugee from other groups. The brethren who are "born and bred" are much more interesting to them. They get cut much more slack and get much more "respect".
Lots of people have never gotten over the 70`s people are judged according to if they left WCG before or after Herbert Armstrong died. If you left before he died you are not one of them and if you left after you are kosher.
brave anonymous poster said...
WCG was the result of an imperfect man trying to follow God's direction.....Herbert didn't get it all right the first time, or the second time, or the third...and some things he never did get right, but he kept on trying....(the same thing can be said about any Church member)
there are people who like to latch onto every mistake HWA made, and try to use them to discredit God's instructions to mankind.......well, I'd hate to think that the validity of the bible was dependant upon how well I followed it's instructions.
You know I hear the exact same argument from Catholics supporting priests convicted of pedaphilia.
HWA slept with his daughter, that's both incest and pedaphilia. Don't tell me that's a mistake we all make! And don't tell me that I should over look that when evaluating what he taught, and his moral authority to teach what he taught.
"WCG was the result of an imperfect man trying to follow God's direction....."
What is your opinion of Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart? Do you consider them men who were trying to follow God's direction?
Paul
hmmm, Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart....
well, since they do not know the true God they can't be trying to follow His directions...
like all of the "Sunday Christians", they are in a state of confusion and are simply doing the best that they can, without the gift of understanding that God gives to His called ones.
nothing they've done will be held against them.....they will have a opportunity to understand the truth, at a time God so chooses.
and as for the incest charges against HWA, I don't know that they are true, and don't really care. I would hope for the girl's sake that they are false, but who knows?
people tend to see sexual sins as bigger sins, but is that how God sees them?....is there a "big sin" and a "little sin" ?
they are both dead now anyway, so what is the point of bringing it up? I suppose that if HWA were your idol you would dwell on it, but it's not an issue for me.
in Rom. 7 Paul describes himself as a "wretched man" ,and he was an apostle....now, if an apostle had such a hard battle against sin, why should those of us in the Church think we'd have it any easier?
the point I'm trying to make is, if you focus on the man you will find plenty of ammunition to use against him.....none of us even come close to perfect, but that in no way negates what the bible says.... if I got up and plowed my field on Saturday morning, that would in no way negate the Sabbath commandment.
so why all of the discussion about HWA's shortcomings?
Paul and all,
Paul, I thought I would use your comment to make a point.
Paul said:
Anonymous said...
"WCG was the result of an imperfect man trying to follow God's direction....."
What is your opinion of Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart? Do you consider them men who were trying to follow God's direction?
Paul
My response:
Your question, I believe, gets at the core of a very important issue. Often, it is hard to separate issues and see what the relevant point is.
I think many would read your question and quickly think, no Swaggart and Baker were hypocrites. They really were not trying to follow God's direction. Same with Armstrong. He was not trying to follow God's direction. He was a hypocrite.
There would be some truth to that. We are all hypocrites to one degree or another, whether we want to admit it or not.
So, yes, there is some hypocrisy in all of us. That is a given.
Next question. Is the degree of hypocrisy the issue? I would say yes. If someone has a great deal of hypocrisy that causes me, and most people I think, to have little regard for the person, or perhaps disdain.
Many have concluded that Armstrong had a great deal of hypocrisy. I understand that conclusion and can see why many would come to it. I don't agree with it.
Personally, I don't think there are too many people, if any, that intentionally are extreme hypocrites. Are there a lot of extremely evil people out there? I believe there are. But being evil and intentionally hypocritical are two completely different "beasts."
Long story.
Our minds are that deceitful. That is also, in my opinion, a core truth to the plan of God. If you've been in the Church of God you understand where I am coming from. Although if one has come into the Church of God in the past 10 years perhaps one would not understand. This very important truth has faded into the background, if even that, in the past decade or more. It was also taught in an improper way when it was taught often. Used as a club, not simply as a truth.
This is getting long. My point.
It does not matter who the person is when it comes to the truth. The truth is the truth no matter who utters it.
From my experience, no religion teaches (when you look at their "doctrines") a plan that I believe would come from God (if God is loving, wise, etc.-which I think he is) but one. That is the Church of God.
Do the people in the Church of God reflect that teaching and behave in a manner that God supports? Not very well.
But that is irrelevant to what the truth is.
This is true whether one is your "basic hypocrite" (all, or almost all of us) or an extreme one.
Jim
"brave" wrote: there are people who like to latch onto every mistake HWA made, and try to use them to discredit God's instructions to mankind
No doubt there are, but that would be an inaccurate characterization of my premise.
I said it elsewhere in past postings (and Gavin chose to highlight an excerpt once): There were intriguing things promoted by HWA. Sabbath observance has historical underpinnings. At first glance, there were things that had intellectual merit.
But for the baptized member, observance soon went far beyond those things, to a complete and ever-changing system of dos and don'ts, many of which had no basis in fact and were simply a product of misinterpretation or misapplication.
What "brave" speaks of re: "God's instruction to mankind" is subjective. My point is directed not at fundamental theological concepts such as "do unto others," but rather to the system that rose up under HWA. It's so deeply ingrained in people that many, if not most, have a difficult time separating feeling (or longstanding interpretation and practice) from fact.
My issue with that goes back to something I've addressed before. It's apparent something was amiss in the personal peccadillos of HWA (although I admit to the use of peccadillos more for the alliteration than for accuracy, since the foibles weren't at all minor). And it calls into question -- it must call into question -- the premise that God would have founded his "end-time Work" through such an individual, behaving as that individual was at the time.
I should clarify something else. I'm not an HWA "hater." I met him, spoke to him, dined with him. I heard him speak countless times going back to the '50s. I applauded for him. I was persuaded to support him.
But, over time, I could not rationalize the message when compared with the behavior. And that begins a gradual process that causes one to question the claims and teachings that had heretofore been simply accepted.
I am aware of the many people who came out of "mainstream" Christianity to join up with HWA or the WCG over the years. I am well acquainted with that process. And I respect the experience.
But my sense is that those people would not have been so accepting if they had known the kind of behavior in which the man, and the number two man, had chosen to engage.
If it wouldn't have been OK in the 50s, or 60s, or 70s, and so on -- why is it any less objectionable now? And so, why is my premise not valid with those who have chosen to stay?
It's unfortunate to say, but where I'm coming from is that "the message" -- the package and system from which the WCG and its offshoots draw their credibility -- had everything to do with the man.
Turns out, that was a risky place to be. When things came to light, it unleashed a series of events that could only be viewed as inevitable. Comfortable? Not necessarily. But it is what it is, and many kind, decent and caring people have been left to try to make sense of it all. And that's a bit of a struggle, no matter which side of the fence one ends up on.
It was stated here that Herb "kept on trying" so we are to let up on him?
First what did he "Keep on trying" to do? Deceive all of us is what i find, He would not even acknowledge the setting of dates , so i don't think that coupled with all the other crap he fed everyone made him a true minister of God.
God's word seems to me to point his kind out to us as being "false" and we should have nothing to do with him or his minions who spew the same garbage out of their mouths.
rod 2
Northerner said..
While these lines of attack may be pleasing to the anti-RCM crowd, they hardly amount to anything.<<<
When a man gives his word, it is duty and honor to go forward and follow thru. However RM is NOT a man worth of honor, but a worthless man. If you can call him a man! He is a coward that has no honor, no truth in his soul and absolutely no credibility to those who have a brain that functions!
Ken.
Steve said...I wonder if he took any of it with <<<
Sure he did! He got a nice box! I say we "repo" it!
brave anonymous poster said...
it's not HWA's teaching, it's what God, in His written word the bible, tells us will happen....<<
Funny the way you put it >God, in His written word the bible, tells us will happen<
Or what WILL happen. You people with your prophecies are nutcases at best. Don't give me that crap you are speaking about some "kingdom to come" BS.
You worship that dead "herbal creature" as God!
Ken.
"Or what WILL happen. You people with your prophecies are nutcases at best."
it's interesting how that happens over and over....when someone can't counter an argument they resort to personal attacks.....
oh well.
Post a Comment