True confession time: I was a foundation member of the Church of God, International in New Zealand. Hey, it was a long time ago.
Back then I had quite a collection of sermon tapes from Garner Ted Armstrong and Ron Dart. CGI was, on reflection, a halfway house on the road back to relative sanity. I still have the preview issue of Twentieth Century Watch, the glossy magazine that was designed to take on The Plain Truth. For a short time it appeared that Ted's splinter would take off and provide a credible alternative to WCG, then groaning under the senile ego of Herbert W. Armstrong.
Then there was a major walkout by the group's top talent as Ted threw a hissy fit over who was boss. Al Portune and Wayne Cole came and went, TCW editor Alan Heath dropped off the edges. Greg Doudna and Gary Alexander (both early contributors to the magazine) slipped into the murky waters and swam to shore, David Antion detached. The little Kiwi fellowship quickly wised up and fell apart.
CGI downsized but survived with Ted and Ron, the Dynamic Duo, running the operation till Ted had a close encounter during a therapeutic massage session. Ron bailed and the board belatedly dumped Ted, who then set up shop again with the hilariously misnamed Intercontinental Church of God.
But you can't kill weeds, or so they say. CGI "consolidated" and battled on.
But has The End now finally arrived? Or is CGI merely coiled to spring out on an unsuspecting world with a stunning new presence? What is certain is that the website is temporarily (?) down. They say they'll be back, but if so, why take down the old site completely?
The armor on the seal, by the way, was modeled on a suit Ted bought on a British junket back in his cash-rich WCG days and had mounted as some kind of anachronistic trophy (medieval armor isn't what the pseudonymous author of Ephesians had in mind.) Ted was booted out, presumably along with his antique armor, but the silly seal remained. If I remember correctly they decided to turn that particular lemon into lemonade by naming their cable TV show Armor of God, though "Armor of Ted" would have been more literally true.
Will CGI return? I guess we'll just have to hold our breaths...
69 comments:
LUSSENHEIDE AMBASSADOR WATCH POSTING INTERNATIONAL!
We are undergoing posting improvements.
We apologize for any inconvenience.
Please check back soon!
LUSSENHEIDE AMBASSADOR WATCH POSTING INTERNATIONAL!
We are undergoing posting improvements.
We apologize for any inconvenience.
Please check back soon!
And don't forget to shower, shave and comb your hair in the meantime.......And a breathe mint wouldn't hurt either, there are ladies here after all :)
It is a wonder.
First, scandal upon scandal.
Then divisions, splits and schisms.
Mass exodus.
"Rightsizing".
Restructuring websites.
Chaos and confusion.
One might begin to think that perhaps God is not a part of the church of gods.
We shall wait upon the Lords [and microgods] of the fiefdom with bated breath until 2012 at which time the Mayan Calendar ends and the world will go on without the folderal gimcrackery of a failed religion.
Perhaps the CGI should try something hypnotic that appeals to the amygdala limbic system like Chri$tian Mu$ic.
there are ladies here after all
Speaking of which, the CGI needs another stud to appeal to the female component out there, someone a little less long in the tooth than either GTA or Brad Pitt. But then, why any women would bother with either CGI or Ambassador Watch is beyond me, although, I suppose that Gavin probably is rather sexy -- but then, as a guy, I wouldn't have a high competency level to evaluate that.
Hmmm... Sex and religion do belong together, after all -- which is something CGI should seriously consider... if not this forum....
Just compare the CGI to a ministry of say, Casey Treat:
http://www.caseytreat.com/
It's quite the formula for a megachurch. The people come flocking -- 10,000+ every weekend.
You just have to admit that there is something really wrong with Armstrongism, what with the total lack of appeal to the masses and all.
"the CGI needs another stud to appeal to the female component"
Hopefully he would be an improvement on Hillsong's effete-voiced, Spike Milligan look-alike pastor.
You just have to admit that there is something really wrong with Armstrongism, what with the total lack of appeal to the masses and all.
It may have something to do with all the past date setting and people not looking for an imminent return of Christ anymore.
I think the adventist movements are all coming to a close and a shift back to mainstream orthodoxy is far more imminent than the return of Christ.
GTA, Ron Dart, Wayne Cole and the rest of the discredited cabal had all fallen from grace before CGI was formed. S it is not surprising that it is falling apart.
Like Tkach senior, GTA died and left his church for his, as an inheritance. Of course, Billy Graham did the same thing. However, GTA's son, Mark, as far I know, was never an ordained minister in any church group, and some of the ministers in CGI objected to setting the agenda for the church. But since they are unable to get a job any where else, they don't mind being insulted, provided Mark keeps paying their salaries.
Would you cross the road in the company of any of these men?
Just for the record Tom, the Church of God International, which we are discussing here, removed GTA a few years before his death.
GTA then formed the grand sounding 'Intercontinental Church of God', which is the inheritance that Mark Armstrong received.
Just for the record Tom, the Church of God International, which we are discussing here, removed GTA a few years before his death.
GTA then formed the grand sounding 'Intercontinental Church of God', which is the inheritance that Mark Armstrong received.
As a cult leader of his very own newly formed church of gods, it may take some time to get the details of his competition straight.
Doug B stated:Speaking of which, the CGI needs another stud to appeal to the female component out there, someone a little less long in the tooth than either GTA or Brad Pitt. But then, why any women would bother with either CGI or Ambassador Watch is beyond me, although, I suppose that Gavin probably is rather sexy -- but then, as a guy, I wouldn't have a high competency level to evaluate that.
Contrary to how some of you guys think…women think. We don’t need a ‘stud ‘ to hold our attraction.
If a man can’t expound with clarity of thought , common sense and a mediocre amount of intelligence,
then it would almost be like listening to one of our fourth graders give a book report on Jane Yolen’s “The Devil's Arithmetic”.
But it wouldn’t hurt if he did look like Brad Pitt who is 44 years and not dead yet :) :)
As for Gavin, he looks like a likable bloke....reminds me of my
Uncle Bob :)
I think CGI has a pretty good rating, seeing that they (unlike all the other 'official' splinter groups)interact with many of the independent COG groups, like Havir's Big Sandy. It's a step in the right direction, one that the other boys (UCG, LCG, EctCG) will not take. And I don't know all the behind the scenes politics of the GTA oust (In the Intercontinental COG the story was that GTA was "stabbed in the back" and the leadership of the CGI were considered only a step lower than Hitler) but from what I have read the CGI did the right thing.
Paul
Perhaps their munchkins are getting ready to FINALLY make the BIG announcement.....
And he's not only MERELY dead, he's really most SINCERELY dead.
And, FREE Trojan "armor" for every "love-offering" given. Guaranteed to have no "dart-holes" in them.
What a deal!
There's no "story" here other than CGI's Web site is being revamped. They're hiring an outside Web master, and it's taking some time.
Douglas Becker saith:
"Hmmm... Sex and religion do belong together, after all --"
That's what HWA must have believed. Sex, religion, and family comes first with Herb, although not necessarily in that order. Exceptions to the blessed state of holy matrimony to allow for divorce were inspired later, in a dream about Ramona.
GTA in heat also must have believed much the same thing, as he thought he was as a New Testament inspired version of King Solomon, who was specially ordained from the womb to preach a prophetic warning message about the end of the world as we know it.
As for "the inheritance Mark Armstrong received", Mark can deny, refuse to read, or ignore the allegations contained in The Tangled Web about his grandfather apostle's sex capades all day long.
Mark surely can't trivialize GTA's extracurricular activities with "hundreds" of AC coeds (according to GTA) as if he were some sort of porn movie star.
Should he experience any lack of memory about it, all he has to to is pop in a videotape in of his father's inheritance - his visit with the masseuse, making a massage truly a family affair.
Darren, that may well be true, but their Web consultant is an imbecile if he/she recommends they pull the existing website off-line for days on end while she/he gets around to cooking up the replacement. In today's web-savvy world that's just plain incompetent.
"The AW webmaster now has views that support atheism, disbelieving parts of the Bible, suggesting that the deuterocaconical books are just as valid as the rest of it, and other non-COG views."
COGwriter Thiel,
If you are going to accuse Gavin of going deuterocaconical, you might as well first learn how to spell it correctly.
Questeruk said:
>>>Just for the record Tom, the Church of God International, which we are discussing here, removed GTA a few years before his death.
GTA then formed the grand sounding 'Intercontinental Church of God', which is the inheritance that Mark Armstrong received.<<<
I stand corrected. You see, unlike others, I can admit when I am wrong.
Tom saith:
However, GTA's son, Mark, as far I know, was never an ordained minister in any church group . . .
Not to mention that your hero, HwA, was a defrocked minister. His ordination was revoked by the COG 7th day "for conduct unbecoming" in 1936 -- about the same time he started his new religious enterprise. Just what this conduct was is open to speculation. Some say he had his hand in the till. Others say nobody could work with the pig head. Still others say he was put out for causing division (just as you say Wayne Cole caused). But the plain truth is he had no "ministry" after that point -- except what he was able to fabricate out of whole cloth. He faked the whole thing.
This also raises the interesting point about the validity of anyone's baptism in the RCG (and later the WCG), including yours. That is, unless you want to believe that even Joe 6-pack down the street where you live could also baptize you, because Joe 6-pack has just as good of credentials as HwA did.
I stand corrected. You see, unlike others, I can admit when I am wrong.
Actually, you now stand corrected twice here. And how humble of you to take such correction when nobody else here can. It's so nice to see you praying at the front of the church, telling all the rest of us sinners at the back of the church about your righteousness.
You da man, Tom! :-)
Sex Scandal Hits Atlanta Mega-Church
"DECATUR, Ga. (AP) - The 80-year-old leader of a suburban Atlanta megachurch is at the center of a sex scandal of biblical dimensions: He slept with his brother's wife and fathered a child by her."
Imagine my shock!
I love the Bible Belt. They just need to keep it buckled up more often if you're gonna go with the program properly.
Stingerski Said:
>>>Not to mention that your hero, HwA, was a defrocked minister.<<<.
Hero is your word not mine. I recognise HWA as a servant of God, because God doesn't call people to follow false ministers.
As I have said before, I also recognise that HWA was not perfect. And I must confess, that I have been very shocked and surprised by the number of things he got wrong. But I am able to understand his failings, because of the Laodicean condition of the church, over which he presided.
>>>His ordination was revoked by the COG 7th day "for conduct unbecoming" in 1936 -- about the same time he started his new religious enterprise. Just what this conduct was is open to speculation. Some say he had his hand in the till. Others say nobody could work with the pig head. Still others say he was put out for causing division.<<<
Yet again, no one is able to be specific about what HWA was supposed to have done wrong. Speculation is not proof of guilt, you may be surprised to learn!
>>>(just as you say Wayne Cole caused).<<<
Wayne Cole caused more than division. He was part of the conspiracy hatched by GTA, Ron Dart and the other gang members, who help GTA set CGI, to get he sate attorney to hand them WCG on a plate. The plot failed because HWA was innocent of all charges.
Now I know that Stan thinks the state attorney dropped the charges for political reasons, but this is pure speculation.
>>>This also raises the interesting point about the validity of anyone's baptism in the RCG (and later the WCG), including yours.<<<
Actually it doesn't, because HWA was a genuine minister Christ. However, some people were baptised who had not truly repented, and their baptism was invalid. Others had repented and were properly baptised, but have since fallen from grace because of sin.
However, I was baptised by a man who is now a member of UCG. He lives somewhere in California. He carried out the water baptism, but Christ baptised me with the Holy Spirit, placing me into the spiritual body of his church.
Sadly, the man who baptised me has also fallen from grace. For he is happy to have fellowship with men who are patently hirelings.
No doubt you and the cabal will continue to criticise HWA, no matter what I say. And even though you don't have any indisputable evidence of his guilt, your irrational mindset will propel you forward with your false, speculative accusations.
I stand corrected. You see, unlike others, I can admit when I am wrong.
As do some other cult leaders who have established their own religion when they have been caught red handed and flat footed.
In fact, Herbert Armstrong would occasionally admit he was wrong under two circumstances:
1) It was to his advantage, i.e. he wanted a divorce or a doctor to cure him;
2) When he couldn't hide the lies any longer, as in Pentecost is not on a Monday.
Of course, as in the case of Tom Moron, it's a pick and choose, mix and match, cafeteria religion, where the favorite color is plaid and the options are always kept open when plausible deniability is desirable.
A well picked "I was wrong" goes a long way to establish a false vulnerability which is then turned into a weapon [as it was here] to bludgeon everyone to death.
My stance on this matter is what it has always been and I offer no apology:
I do not say I am right, just that everyone else is pretty much wrong. I might be wrong, and probably am in some cases, but as sure as death, hell, taxes, revenge and the fury of a woman scorned, there's precious little truth to be found in the blatherings of a crackpot cultmeister who has founded his own religion, pretends it is formed and fomented [as well as fermented] on Herbert Armstrong when it is not, who has assertive incompetence up the kazoo with image far exceeding substance, but even the image is seriously deficient, and who has also established a website which is in serious need of remodeling.
Since I have established websites professionally for others, I make this offer:
$5,000 in advance, non refundable, and I will fix what is wrong with both the image and the substance of the website in question. Tom will be happy with the results. I'm a professional when it comes to such things. Of course, the $5,000 is just to get started and the fee will probably be triple that by the time all the expenses are added in. High quality work costs. Still, it's a bargain for someone as deficient as our illustrious cultmeister, if he wants to compete with Pack or Cox or even be in the running with the UCG. And hey, we can get him set up with a TV program -- after all, Robert Petry has one. If you're setting yourself up as a preacher, you might as well do a good job, not that anyone else in Armstrong Land will cooperate with him.
Ha! Ha! He'll never get a vacation ever again! All the sermons every week, plus the Feasts, plus writing all those booklets, magazine articles and making a weekly TV program, he'll be too swamped to post here. And think of it: If he really puts his money where his mouth is, then his commission from Jesus Christ is to preach the gospel to the world. The poor man has no choice but to sacrifice all he has and pour his whole life into his very own Church Corporate, if he wants to make it into the Kingdom of God. Anything less and Jesus will have nothing good to say when and if He returns.
Get with it Tom, you have a huge amount of Work to do and not much time to do it.
And you'll see! You won't be laughing at him any more! You'll see!
No wait.
You won't be laughing at his website any more.
You'll be rotflyao from his seriously demented deluded self-righteous postings here.
Some things never change.
tom saith: "I stand corrected. You see, unlike others, I can admit when I am wrong."
Just ask him, he'll tell you!
(He who alone, doeth good works)
I checked out his website yesterday...his articles contain many first person examples of his righteousness.
He clearly thinks very highly of himself...
hum·ble (huhm-buhl)
–adjective
1. not proud or arrogant; modest: to be humble although successful.
2. having a feeling of insignificance, inferiority, subservience, etc.: In the presence of so many world-famous writers I felt very humble.
3. low in rank, importance, status, quality, etc.; lowly: of humble origin; a humble home.
4. courteously respectful: In my humble opinion you are wrong.
5. low in height, level, etc.; small in size: a humble member of the galaxy.
–verb (used with object)
6. to lower in condition, importance, or dignity; abase.
7. to destroy the independence, power, or will of.
8. to make meek: to humble one's heart.
Actually I remember the Suit of Armour in the office and the coat of arms. I believe the new log is implying that GTA is coming soon.
No doubt you and the cabal will continue to criticise HWA, no matter what I say.
No, we are criticizing you.
And you pretend not to know it.
What arrogance you have and how cowardly you are to hide behind Herbert Armstrong while still criticizing him.
Here's a hint, bucko: There are no church eras. The Worldwide Church of God was not the Laodocean era of God's Church, Herbert Armstrong was neither God's Prophet nor an apostle, although he was a false prophet. And you cannot prove Herbert Armstrong was either a prophet or apostle -- in fact, you, yourself have undercut him to do nothing but reduce his already besmirched credibility.
You've even admitted that every last one of the ministers he has taught and sent forth are hirelings. How can that be, if he were truly a Work of God? And you say the minister who baptized you has fallen away -- if he were of us, he would not have departed from us: You've impeached your own witnesses. You are a serious liar.
And now you are a false prophet following down the same path of perdition, but doing it with a lot less style.
Congratulations.
You are simply attempting to cash in on Herbert Armstrong to support your own religious cult you've founded as an incompetent amateur master manipulator, which is absolutely disgustingly contemptuous.
logo
For Tom, for this is him:
II Timothy 3:1-9
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.
Hiring a professional firm or professionals -- even incompetent ones -- to redesign a website is not a cheap undertaking. Remember the web designers make a living off doing it, and usually a pretty good one at that. Does anyone know how much the CGI website redesign is costing?
Back when, a few years ago, Wade Cox had his CCg website redesigned by his son-in-law. Suddenly, "Internet Expense" went from around $4,000 to about $28,000 in one year. Of course there are lots of explanations, but... avoiding all appearances of evil is not an option.
Another thing to consider about the CGI is the internal struggles it has had. One year, a minister of the CGI went to Israel on tour with some members and prospective members. A married couple wanted to be baptized there in the Jordan river and were given the go ahead by the minister in attendance. When the minister got back to the United States, he was summarily reprimanded and dispatched, because he allowed baptisms the way Jesus Christ was baptized and not the way the CGI did things. He departed, and it did serious damage to the CGI just by his exit, since he was a highly respected minister within the group. And this was after GTA had been forced out by the Board.
The one thing one could derive from CGI experiences is that the group doesn't particularly have very good judgment.
Sorry everyone for going briefly off-topic, but I wanted to let Tom know that I read his response re: West Bromwich/Black Country accent just now (was out of town over the weekend), and I responded to Tom's response. That's at the tail end of the New Journal threat, comment 102, I believe.
No, Tom, I don't make fun of Black Country speech! I love it!
Sorry for the interruption.
No, Tom, I don't make fun of Black Country speech!
It never ceases to amaze us just how wrong cult leaders can be, based on their bad assumptions, at the top of their hyperbole -- but there it is, someone not getting their facts straight and slandering Camfinch.
Tsk. Tsk.
Now there's a religion that no one but a narcissistic source could live with.
And that's it, isn't it: Tom boy is looking for some narcissistic sources. Too bad most here have had their fill of them.
As someone who was in CGI a long long time ago now. i would like to point out to people who weren`t that Garner Ted was the "figure head" but the real Biblical heart, of cgi was Ron Dart.
Ted was busy with everything but the sermons and the teachings ex cgi brethren remember are Darts not teds.
When Cgi split it shattered like a glass varse and all that was left for brethren was the scriptually teachings.
Excgi brethren are a bit different to the brethren who stayed in ww for the last waltze.
>>>there's precious little truth to be found in the blatherings of a crackpot cultmeister.
My argument against those who attack HWA's doctrine is that firstly, his doctrines were NOT unique. You can trace them back to the 1600s where other people actually believed them as well.
And secondly where on earth do you expect us to go, what church do you expect me to attend? Should i become a Roman Catholic, Jehovah Witness, Mormon, Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical?
And thirdly, scholars have debated for centuries over these issues and dissenters can be found in England in the 1600s not agreeing with established church doctrine. There were many who disagreed with infant baptism for example.
So, who makes you the voice of authority as to what people should or should not believe?
How come God has given you some mystical special powers of insight as to what is truth and false, when the rest of us don't have a clue?
And why is it, if scholars have debated these things for centuries resulting in millions of church splits and denominations that you have have this special knowledge of what truth is, (as HWA once said in a tape, if you have truth don't be selfish about it, share it with us). How can a modern 21 century layman (who doesn't have access to originals know more than the dissenters recorded throughout history who had access to documents now lost?)
I am afraid it seems that you are the crackpot if you actually think you know the Bible and what truth is, only God knows that!
Unless you are a scholar, knows original languages, studied Hebrew and Greek, familiar with the customs of the day, privy to secret documents then your knowledge of the Bible cannot be trusted and to claim that HWA was a crackpot is nothing more than a subjective remark not based on authority or biblical scholarship.
"And thirdly, scholars have debated for centuries over these issues..."
It's more like a minority of people with a taste for the comforts of legalism have rejected the writings of Paul.
The whole issue became pretty clear when I accepted Paul's writings on face value instead of reading HWA/GTA/Dart's interpretation into them.
Life would be so much simpler for the COG'ers if they would just reject Christ and convert to Judaism.
Paul
Robert said: "Unless you are a scholar, knows original languages, studied Hebrew and Greek, familiar with the customs of the day, privy to secret documents then your knowledge of the Bible cannot be trusted and to claim that HWA was a crackpot is nothing more than a subjective remark not based on authority or biblical scholarship."
Robert - Herbert didn't know the orginal languages, study Hebrew, Greek, or have intimate knowledge of the customs of those ancient days...
Robert said: "And secondly where on earth do you expect us to go, what church do you expect me to attend? Should i become a Roman Catholic, Jehovah Witness, Mormon, Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical?"
Robert: I hear this argument fairly often from those affiliated with armstrongism. The commonly held misbelief is that the "Truth" as it were is a known quantity and that some group must have it. I have no reason or grounds to suggest a faith for you but I think what we are trying to accomplish here is commentary, critique, and try to get people to use the minds that God gave them.
Robert, The "Truth" is not a known quantity and no one (group or person) has it, once you come to terms with that, a lot of things will become clearer for you.
Robert said: "And thirdly, scholars have debated for centuries over these issues and dissenters can be found in England in the 1600s not agreeing with established church doctrine. There were many who disagreed with infant baptism for example."
Robert, I commented on another thread that 'If God is not the author of confusion', then the Bible may not be wholly inspired by him. The Bible has certainly been the religious equivalent of what the Tower of Babel did for a common language.
In my life I have seen people not only abused by the doctrines and pulpits of armstrongism but I have seen people put themselves (and loved ones) through years and sometimes the rest of their lives a lot of neglect, self denial, misery, poverty, pain, and loneliness all in the name of pleasing God and trying to "qualify" for enternal life. That is heartbreaking.
I don't believe for a minute that Christians are called to a life of suffering and trial. I believe we are called to a life of loving one another and serving each other as we would serve God and as we would have God love us.
If I am wrong, so be it. I'll take whatever I have coming.
Robert, one other thing. I gather from your posts that you do a fair amount of research. That is great as long as you are properly conducting research. The scientific method is to go where the evidence leads you, the cult / armstrongist method is to start with a conclusion and try to find evidence to back it up, discarding anything that doesn't agree along the way.
"I believe we are called to a life of loving one another and serving each other as we would serve God and as we would have God love us."
On exiting Armstrongism, I made the same assessment based off a reading of the NT as a whole. But loving people is not easy. It's very hard for some (especially when there is no Holy Spirit to help you)to treat others as they would treat themselves. It's hard work. However, following rote and ritual is very easy in comparison, and that is the lure of legalism. When your status with God depends on how nice and giving you are even to an enemy seems an improbably task when compared to going to church on a certain day of the week and eating turkey bacon instead of Jimmy Dean sausage. It's a no brainer. Holy Days and tassels win over feeding bums in a soup kitchen.
The problem is that legalism corrodes the good nature that Christians are supposed to develop. This is evident for anyone with eyes to see. Tom Mahon and others like him are the end product of legalism. People clutching at the shadow while ignoring the substance. Whitewashed tombs. People who not only refuse to cast out the bondwoman, but want to marry her.
Tom saith:
I recognise HWA as a servant of God, because God doesn't call people to follow false ministers.
Well Tom, since you admit that you think that HwA was a servant of God, then the only rational conclusion anyone can come to is, you are not called by God.
My advice to you, before you damage yourself further (and perhaps innocent others) is to get OUT of the religion business. This field is already way over-crowded with charlatans, pimps and cult masters. And you don't need to add to their numbers.
>>>The problem is that legalism corrodes the good nature that Christians are supposed to develop.
It is not legalism that corrodes the Christian but it is the spirit that abides in the Armstrongite churches based on the doctrines of being exclusive, fear of contacting people outside the fellowship, fear of being disfellowshipped and the belief that we do not help people outside of the church.
It is the dynamics of the churches of God which are unhealthy in my opinion which leds people to mistreat each other.
They have not come to terms with the concept of "love" towards their own church brethren. A spirit of division abides in the fellowships.
Faulty church doctrine led us not to give to charities, not to do good works to people outside of the church. You cannot blame this on legalism (if we are honest).
Joseph Tkach Snr, to his credit recognised this and tried to get people motivated into doing good deeds encouraging us to treat one another better. Not everything he did was wrong.
The Jews are more legalists than Armstrongites but they do not have the same attitude of not doing good deeds.
The difference is the approach, the Torah within Judaism is something which is observed from the heart, with a willing mind wanting to do good to Hashem (God) and to others. Good deeds is an essential part of faith.
Within Armstrongism one obeys the Law because we are required to do so and if we don't then God will get angry and might send us into captivity or hell. We have the idea of fear and law, so we learn to obey the law to appease an angry God. In that type of environment it isn't long before we start looking at the law as a means of salvation to save us from a terrible fate.
My view is that of the Jewish perspective, my life may be full of rituals but it is the spiritual significance which is important for me. My duty is to do good deeds and to be charitable as much as possible. And there is no God in heaven beating me up with a stick if I sin, rather a patient loving God who will forever bear with my imperfections.
Robert said:
My view is that of the Jewish perspective, my life may be full of rituals but it is the spiritual significance which is important for me. My duty is to do good deeds and to be charitable as much as possible. And there is no God in heaven beating me up with a stick if I sin, rather a patient loving God who will forever bear with my imperfections."
Spoken like a true gentle-man. It's nice to hear the practical thoughts of a life lived as one chooses and in a way that works for them.
"
>>>It's more like a minority of people with a taste for the comforts of legalism have rejected the writings of
I didn't have legalism in mind but it was the nature of God with the debates on the Trinity.
Then there are debates over infant baptism.
Not forgetting the Nicene creed, and why do I have to accept the decisions made by early church fathers? How come they have a better understanding?
As the old saying goes you could literally study yourself out of church (that is if you read any books by Bart D Ehrman particularly the book Lost Scriptures and Lost Christianities). Not for the easily led.
I seem to have read it all from books telling me Jesus was just a fabrication of the Roman gods, to books telling me the gospels are so unreliable you might as well leave now, to gnostic gospels, to books telling me the virgin Mary fled to England with the wife and child of Jesus (mormon book).
So if people are going to swing me one liners saying that there aren't any real problems or try to get me to join any church or think they have the answers, then I know that they just haven't studied anything.
"....then I know that they just haven't studied anything."
It's the same thought I have when I hear a Christian advocate the observance of The Law.
Paul
"In that type of environment it isn't long before we start looking at the law as a means of salvation to save us from a terrible fate."
So you would agree that observance of The Law isn't neccessary for salvation?
Legalism itself was the faulty doctrine of the WCG, and it was directly responsible for the attitude of the members. What was the exclusion based on? The Elect vs the heathen, of course. How was the distinction made? THE LAW. The identifying sign of "God's True People" was observance of the Law. Secondly, the members were led to belive that "real love" was observing the law while good deeds as evidenced by other denominations wasn't worth a dime to God because they didn't obey his Law. It was this way in the ICG.
Paul
Paul
>>>So you would agree that observance of The Law isn't neccessary for salvation?
My view is different to Armstrongites.
Obviously it comes from a Jewish perspective. They quote:
"The Torah is a grand experiment by G-d to see if the human being can live a moral life."
The term law is really an injustice to the word Torah. Torah means instruction, it is a relationship between parent and child or pupil and teacher. God, our teacher is instructing us on how to have a moral life.
It is a document that God gives to his children sharing in their culture, history and traditions.
The idea that observing the Torah for salvation is not from Jewish tradition but from Christian culture through the writings of Paul. The Rabbis decreed that all Jews have an inheritance in the world to come.
There is debate as to whether the apostleship of Paul can be accepted as there are religious groups (eg. Ebionites see www.ebionites.org, Netzarim see www.netzarim.org.il) who do not accept Paul whom believe he is a deceiver. They tear up Paul's writings (much in the same way some do today with HWAs writings).
The law cannot save if we acknowledge the sacrifice of Jesus as being relevant to our faith. Rather the law is used as a way to make sure we are leading moral wholesome lives.
If we are looking to the law as a means of perfection we will be disappointed as we will always fail given our own human natures, societies pressures, and if we believe in the devil, then, his influence as well.
"My view is different to Armstrongites."
So you would agree that observance of the Law isn't necessary for salvation?
Paul
Paul was a deceiver. He hijacked and is the founder of Christianity unrelated to any real teachings of Jesus. You can read the authentic letters of Paul and never get a clue he was talking about anything but a cosmic heavenly Christ or that anyone named Jesus had lived a mere decade earlier to his alledged conversion.
Robert said: My argument against those who attack HWA's doctrine is that firstly, his doctrines were NOT unique. You can trace them back to the 1600s where other people actually believed them as well.
So what? Just because some or all of a religious leader's doctrines were around before he latched onto them, that doesn't make those doctrines true.
And secondly where on earth do you expect us to go, what church do you expect me to attend? Should I become a Roman Catholic, Jehovah Witness, Mormon, Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical?
When you find that a religious leader's teachings are false, the first thing you do is stop following those teachings. You can worry about "where do I go next?" after you stop going the wrong direction.
And thirdly, scholars have debated for centuries over these issues and dissenters can be found in England in the 1600s not agreeing with established church doctrine. There were many who disagreed with infant baptism for example.
Dissenters can be found in every time and place, disagreeing with others on matters of doctrine. Just because somebody disagrees with a doctrine, that doesn't make the doctrine false. I'm afraid this will actually require you to sit down and think and study and think -- a simple wave of the hand and a "others in England agreed with me on one or two points of doctrine, and anyway where would I go if not to one of the hundreds of squabbling Armstrongist sects" just won't cut it.
How can a modern 21 century layman (who doesn't have access to originals know more than the dissenters recorded throughout history who had access to documents now lost?)
What makes you think those dissenters had access to documents now lost?
I am afraid it seems that you are the crackpot if you actually think you know the Bible and what truth is, only God knows that!
If it is impossible for the human mind to apprehend truth, then why are you wasting your time posting comments here?
Unless you are a scholar, knows original languages, studied Hebrew and Greek, familiar with the customs of the day, privy to secret documents then your knowledge of the Bible cannot be trusted and to claim that HWA was a crackpot is nothing more than a subjective remark not based on authority or biblical scholarship.
On the contrary, it is possible to know that Herbert Armstrong was a crackpot without expert knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, or access to allegedly secret documents that never existed in the first place. Just check his variable teachings against each other, against scripture, and against common sense, and take note of his numerous false predictions, and pay attention to the witness of the way he lived his life and the way he treated his fellowman. If that's not enough to conclude he was a crackpot, then I guess we must all be content to mope around through life with a vapid look in our eyes and trailing a line a drool down the corner of our mouths, perennially the prey to the latest charlatan who comes along claiming to be God's End-Time Apostle.
Paul was a deceiver. He hijacked and is the founder of Christianity unrelated to any real teachings of Jesus. You can read the authentic letters of Paul and never get a clue he was talking about anything but a cosmic heavenly Christ or that anyone named Jesus had lived a mere decade earlier to his alledged conversion.
Yawn. I got my fill of such unfalsifiable conspiracy-theory Apostasy of the Lost Century drivel in the WCG.
There is debate as to whether the apostleship of Paul can be accepted as there are religious groups (eg. Ebionites see www.ebionites.org, Netzarim see www.netzarim.org.il) who do not accept Paul whom believe he is a deceiver. They tear up Paul's writings (much in the same way some do today with HWAs writings).
You talk as if the Ebionites and Nazarenes who existed in the first few centuries of the Christian era survived continuously to the present day. The only so-called Ebionites or Netzarim that might be around today would be new inventions, spurious revivals with as much unbroken historical continuity as the Worldwide Church of God had.
Paul said: Legalism itself was the faulty doctrine of the WCG,
No, the central faulty doctrine was that, in preparation for the imminent return of Jesus Christ, God had appointed Herbert Armstrong to restore the One True Church and to restore "the Truth" that allegedly had been lost for 1,900 years.
and it was directly responsible for the attitude of the members.
No, it wasn't "legalism," it was Armstrongism.
What was the exclusion based on?
Whether or not you accepted Herbert Armstrong as the divinely-appointed supreme leader of the Philadelphia Era of the One True Church.
Yes, there were a lot of other false teachings orbiting that teaching, but it was belief in the special place of Herbert Armstrong in Salvation History that underlay the old WCG's religious system. Once faith in Herbert Armstrong begins to erode, the entire system starts to crumble, little by little at first, and then finally the whole thing tumbles down in a heap.
"The Gnostic Paul" by Elaine Pagels, "Paul the Mythmaker," by Hyam Maccoby, Gregory Jenks on "What did Paul Know About Jesus," and Lillian Freudman's work on Anti-Semitism and the New Testament are quite able to change a yawn into a "hmmm" more easily than you would think.
why do the heathen rage? ;-)
"The Gnostic Paul" by Elaine Pagels, "Paul the Mythmaker," by Hyam Maccoby, Gregory Jenks on "What did Paul Know About Jesus," and Lillian Freudman's work on Anti-Semitism and the New Testament are quite able to change a yawn into a "hmmm" more easily than you would think.
Not likely. As I said, I got my fill of that kind of conspiracy theory bilge and hack (pseudo)scholarship in the WCG. Indeed, the way Pagels slices and dices and misquotes her sources, she puts your average Armstrongist prooftexter to shame. In my opinion, Pagels and company belong to the school of thought known for the Auto-Anal Extraction Methodology.
>>>there's precious little truth to be found in the blatherings of a crackpot cultmeister.
Robert, I was talking about Tom.
Please get off your soap box based on a misunderstanding.
"No, the central faulty doctrine was that, in preparation for the imminent return of Jesus Christ, God had appointed Herbert Armstrong to restore the One True Church and to restore "the Truth" that allegedly had been lost for 1,900 years."
And that was based on....? What was it that made HWA different from the thousands of other preachers? What was it that made his church different? Exactly what was it that differentiated HWA and his church from the others if not adherence to The Law?
Paul
What was it that made HWA different from the thousands of other preachers? What was it that made his church different? Exactly what was it that differentiated HWA and his church from the others if not adherence to The Law?
False prophecies based on British Israelism -- that's what made Herbert Armstrong's man-made religion different.
Science is mostly, more or less, based on the pragmatism of reproducibility: If you do the same thing under mostly the same conditions, you get the same results. Science moves from postulation, to hypothesis, to law, by being able to reproduce experiments and take the same results. There are observable results.
So it is with Armstrongism. Each time and every time, pretty much -- except for the anomalies introduced at the quantum level -- the predictions of the Armstrongists fail. We did not flee in 1972. There was no great tribulation between 1972 and 1975. Jesus Christ did not return in 1975 or so. The forests of the Pacific Northwest did not die off so there were no trees between 1964 and 1974. The famines did not occur. And just in case the Armstrongists want to say it just happened a little late, let's just say that the false prophet who said in 1972 in Penticton, "I will lead you into the Kingdom" has died.
Now there are results: Reproducible results which occur over and over again: Divisions, schisms and splits. There are really good scientific reasons for this: Ego. Narcissism makes the spit-off after spit-off boringly predictable. No surprises there. The church of gods are at war with one another, biting and devouring each other, with slanders and libel flowing like Niagara Falls. It takes neither a genius or a Prophet of God to map the future of the church of gods. If they don't dispatch each other, they will die of attrition, or more accurately, scientifically, entropy. Nothing can save them because they don't really have the right kind of faith.
No, the church of gods have faith in premises which have been disproved over and over again. The Great Disappointment of William Miller will be encountered again and again. Armstrongism will fail, as the loving, kind God the Father whose Mercy never fails, stubbornly and persistently staunchly resists allowing a single prediction of any of the Armstrongists to ever come true the way they have posited them. He wants to insure that people don't have an excuse for idolatry to worship a man instead of Him -- and that is reproducible. God's Mercy never fails. Prophecy fails, particularly when it comes from the false prophets like Herbert Armstrong that Jesus himself warned us all against that they are ravening wolves.
So God's Mercy never fails: He keeps hoping that people will be released from the absolute bondage of slavishly following children of the Devil, filled with lies, deceptions and, yes, even murder. There's not just anger, there's a lot of hate, often thinly disguised. It's one thing to be angry because people hurt themselves and quite another to want revenge when egos are punctured -- often by nothing more than neutral facts.
Therefore choose: I set before thee this day, blessing and cursing... choose life. That's not from me. The claim it is from God. It's still good advice: Repent of dead works and pursue pure religion and undefiled. Go ahead. Perform the scientific experiment and see whether or not God's Mercy fails.
And if it does, you're doing something very wrong.
I couldn't possibly agree more, Douglas! These people (HWA/WCG) set themselves up as being better than Jesus, or knowing more than Jesus, who told us that even He didn't know when the end was coming! So, HWA thought he had everything figured out with his nice neat little 7,000 year plan and 19 year time cycles, and he used his theory to create an artificial sense of urgency within his donor base, raking in millions of dollars which he was able to use in his own inimitable profligate manner without any sort of accountability. So, surprise, surprise! Jesus ignored HWA's schedule. In fact, Jesus seems to be treating the ACOGs in the same manner in which He treated the Pharissees, doesn't He?
It makes one wonder, having watched it all unravel, how anyone could still believe that God ever did work through this totally FUBAR man and organization.
BB
"Science is mostly, more or less, based on the pragmatism of reproducibility: If you do the same thing under mostly the same conditions, you get the same results. Science moves from postulation, to hypothesis, to law,
.. Each time and every time, pretty much -- except for the anomalies introduced at the quantum level -- the predictions of the Armstrongists fail."
Like MARK's prediction of the fall of Jerusalem - written after the fact !
What the AC motto should have said: 'SCIENCE IS THE FOUNDATION OF KNOWLEDGE'
douglas becker said:
>>>Science is mostly, more or less, based on the pragmatism of reproducibility: If you do the same thing under mostly the same conditions, you get the same results.<<<
Wow! I am very impressed with the exactness of the above comment. So let me analyse it to see what we all may learn from Mr. Becker's profound observation.
We note that Mr. Becker confidently asserts: "Science is mostly, more or less, based on the pragmatism of reproducibility:"
However, the logic and precision of this penetrating observation puzzles my simple mind. For instance, is it "mostly," or is it "more or less?" Perhaps the great man will draw upon the sagacity of his great intellect, and deign to explain!
Anyway, for the benefit of those with simple minds like my own, it is an indisputable maxim that empiricism proves nothing. Empiricism may demonstrate that an event often occurs under certain conditions, but it can't prove that it will always happen. For example, drugs trials have shown that they are effective against certain diseases, yet the same drugs might have an adverse effect on another patient. So the empirical evidence from the trials is not proof that the drug will be helpful to every patient.
Therefore, science can never solves the problems that threaten to overwhelm us. If medicine could truly cure diseases, health care authorities would be knocking down hospitals, not building more and more every year. If psychiatry and psychology were helpful to people, our mental institutions and prisons would be empty.
But I wouldn't expect a man of Mr.Becker's erudition to understand these facts. They are much too simple for his towering intellect, which spent most of it time analysing the minutia of HWA's so-called false prophecies and perceived bad behaviour. Wow!
So what have we learned from Mr. Becker's observation? We learn that: "He neither understands what he says, nor whereof he affirms."
"Therefore, science can never solves the problems that threaten to overwhelm us. If medicine could truly cure diseases, health care authorities would be knocking down hospitals, not building more and more every year. If psychiatry and psychology were helpful to people, our mental institutions and prisons would be empty."
As opposed to what? Divine healing? The Return of Christ? I'll stick with penicillin, thank you very much.
Paul
"So the empirical evidence from the trials is not proof that the drug will be helpful to every patient."
It is evidence that the drug is helpful in some situations, and like MOST or ALL drugs (naturally or chemically derived)show adverse side effects in certain people due to things like genetic diffferences (high or low levels of a metabolizing enzyme that alters the drug to differences in the expression of cell receptors, ect) or other concurrent health problems, age, weight, physical differences, ect.
Paul
Anonymous said...
Sex Scandal Hits Atlanta Mega-Church
"DECATUR, Ga. (AP) - The 80-year-old leader of a suburban Atlanta megachurch is at the center of a sex scandal of biblical dimensions: He slept with his brother's wife and fathered a child by her."
Imagine my shock!
I love the Bible Belt. They just need to keep it buckled up more often if you're gonna go with the program properly.
A chastity belt it is not!
The Bible belt has a design flaw, it keeps dropping pants to the knees. Denial of sexuality just causes it to come out. Better to say "yeah, I am capable of that", and then walk away. These guys pretend they have no such tendencies. And then blame the devil (or the woman).
I remember some local ATL protestant ministers who hired a prostitute to entrap a local Catholic priest while I was living there. The politics of it all reeked. And it was on talk radio day after day.
Then a year later, Charles Stanley had a scandal, and I am sure there's been on a year since.
Women go for rock stars, and in a church the preacher is the rock star.
But you gotta hand it to GTA, only he could tell a woman, "God will forgive you, I'm important to God's plan on earth!" That end-time witness has gone the way of all things. Guess he wasn't that important to God's plan after all.
Bamboo,
Charles Stanley's whopping big scandel was a divorce. Unless you know of something else that wasn't on public record.
Jared Olar as far as I can tell you should be studying into these modern versions of these groups as it may help you in your search to rediscover the hebrews roots of the faith as promoted by Grace and Knowledge (graceandknowledge.faithweb.com).
I couldn't help but notice a Jared Olar writing articles for Grace and Knowledge so I am assuming it is you that write for Doug Ward.
My only criticism of the site is why on earth have you got Catholic festival dates listed alongside Jewish ones?
Notice WHO ARE WE:
"we believe that with legalism and error removed, the great value and meaning of the Sabbath and annual Hebrew festivals shine through more clearly than ever. Without apology, we will joyfully celebrate here the special culture and wholesome traditions of the WCG."
An interesting perspective that you are removing the legalism of the Torah which commands you to keep those days. Actually no different from today's Messianic movement, really, the days are observed not as requirements but as tokens of love to show the Jews that gentiles actually care about God and the Jews.
For the record the Netzarim group in Israel is the only (Nazarene Jewish) group that is officially recognised by some Orthodox Jews.
Joining the Netzarim will allow people the right to settle in Israel though you will be living as an Orthodox Jew (with a belief in Ribbi Yeshua).
The organisation was formed by a former baptist minister in the 1980s. To quote them: "The only Way for non-Jews to follow Ribi Yәhoshua as he taught: according to his 1st-century Torah teachings in the legitimate (Pharisee = modern Orthodox) sect of the Jewish community and praying in a Pharisee = modern Orthodox Beit-ha-Kәnësët."
The modern day Ebionite movement is not offically recognised by anyone within Judaism (to my horror they don't practice vegetarianism --and I am sure the ebionites were vegetarian weren't they?).
Robert said...
An interesting perspective that you are removing the legalism of the Torah which commands you to keep those days.
Actually no different from today's Messianic movement, really, the days are observed not as requirements but as tokens of love to show the Jews that gentiles actually care about God and the Jews.
Amazing.
Dropping the legalism of the Jews for the even more onerous legalism of Saul of Tarsus.
Most churches claim God wants your money.
I'm glad he's taking tokens now.
I've got a few left over tokens from Chucky Cheese.
The world will all be a better place when all the Jews become perfected as good little evangelicals - or else - according to Anne Coulter. "She's a man baby!" I would think that attitude would really really piss Jews off.
Like God can't deal with people within their cultural context?
However, the logic and precision of this penetrating observation puzzles my simple mind.
And we wouldn't expect anything more of Tom's cult world.
Sure, Newtonian physics works in the "real" world, unless or until examination occurs at the quantum levels.
The trick here is "the same conditions" -- often the exact precise conditions are not going to be the same.
However, in the case of Herbert Armstrong who was always wrong in his lifetime about his false prophecies, there was a scientific consistency.
But to an undiscriminating non scientist like Tom is too dense to understand, having set himself in the futile attempt to prove the world revolves around him.
Tom plays games with terms, just as a good psychopath would.
the big scandal around Charles Stanley was, IMHO, how the baptists didn't allow divorced pastors until Charles got one, then suddenly, it was ok to be divorced.
Back to "His ordination was revoked by the COG 7th day "for conduct unbecoming" in 1936". Wherever did Stingerski come up with this inanity? It was 1938 and the Salem conference of the COG7 were ridding themselves of festival supporters. They revoked Herbert's credentials (which, by the way, they had granted him in the first place without any request by him) and those of Clarence Dodd, another feast supporter. (This is the same Dodd who co-authored the book variously published as "The History of the True Religion" and "A History of the True Church" which Herman Hoeh modified under the tittle of "A True History of the True Church". This man's work has evolved into the Assemblies of Yahweh whose website is www.paleotimes.org.)
Post a Comment