"France's 1996 list of dangerous cults, for example, contains 172 groups, including Jehovah's Witnesses, Hare Krishnas, the Worldwide Church of God, the Unification Church..."It's not true what they say about the French you know. Obviously they're a heck of a lot more perceptive than your typical pseudo-Israelite Anglo.
Anyway, the quote comes from TIME magazine. No word whether there's a more recent edition of the cult list. AW's advice? Quick Joe, fly across the ditch (you've gotta have frequent flyer points to burn) for a breakfast croissant, with garlic basted escargot, and give the French department responsible for these things a copy of your book while you're there, that'll sort things out. Quick, not a moment to spare!
On another subject entirely, here's a blog post about the Wolverton Bible, including a few nice examples of Basil's work.
39 comments:
Good on the French. When they see a troublesome religion, like Armstrongism, they clearly are willing to treat them as the social menaces that they are.
Why should the French rely on the Catholic Church to get them safely to the next life when there's Dr Tkach who has a PHD in God Science ? He's expensive, but eternity is a long time. Think about it and invest with the best.
"AW's advice? Quick Joe, fly across the ditch (you've gotta have frequent flyer points to burn) for a breakfast croissant, with garlic basted escargot, and give the French department responsible for these things a copy of your book while you're there, that'll sort things out. Quick, not a moment to spare!"
Don't give Junior any ideas, Gavin, he may just take you up on it.
"France's 1996 list of dangerous cults, for example, contains 172 groups, including Jehovah's Witnesses, Hare Krishnas, the Worldwide Church of God, the Unification Church and even transcendental meditationists — all of whom have largely shed their cult status in the U.S. and the U.K."
Ah, I had such hopes for ze French --- until I read the part after the ellipsis. :-(
I am not sure if it is good for Joe to explain or not. I knew a guy in Big Sandy who changed his name from Jim to Tony. I have no idea why. Just did it one day. And when you addressed him as Jim he ignored you as if he had no idea who you were talking to. Maybe that should be the strategy.
-- Neo
I wonder if the French authorities also payed attention to the USA National Spelling Bee 2009 Championship this past week, where the French (and WCG/GCI, other COGs) would have or should have picked up the winning word, "LAODICEAN". Hmmmmm... wonder if God and Jesus had anything to do with making sure that on the eve of Pentecost (holy spirit signifying a change of era), that this specific word at this secular competition was indeed a message and warning for today to be SPELLED OUT REALLY GOOD.
Too bad that the French don't recognize troublesome large cults like the Catholics and treat them like the social menace that they are.
Makes one wonder why the French were always predominently Catholic, doesn't it?
It wasn't the French papists that burned Joan of Ark at the stake, it was the English. However, it was the country and cult she fought so bravely for that found her guilty of heresy and betrayed her to her horrible fate.
Ah . . . ze Frunch, the empire of Napoleon that crumbled and surrended to the Germans when Hitler shook a sabre at 'em. Brave folks, those French.
Hmmmm. Where were the French in Afghanistan? In Iraq? Hey, and what happened to the French when the US went in to help them in the Vietnam fiasco - you guessed it, they turned tail and ran like a whipped dog.
Can't blame 'em though, cowardness is just part of the French nature.
Gavin,
Your ... ellipsis at the end of your first paragraph conveniently omits the remainder of the sentence in Time:
"all of whom have largely shed their cult status in the U.S. and the U.K."
Now let's at least be somewhat fair if we choose to ridicule.
Although we need to wonder about the French for their apparent eager participation in the gradual Islamification of their nation, (frogs in boiling water syndrome) we should also applaud their past common sense in recognizing WCG for what it was.
Regarding the blog entry on Basil Wolverton, I felt that the writer presented a fair and objective picture and overview. It was good to see the Jacob's Ladder illustration again.
I had not known that HWA quashed the NT volume due to the commandment about images. Clearly, they could have found a creative way around this. Christ could have been depicted as a shining aura in some cases, or the illustrations could have been presented as what Jesus saw around him.
WCG was known to have a completely different gospel (the one Wolverton had already illustrated in "1975 in Prophecy") from that which was generally assumed by normal readers of the Bible. I believe that it is this which would have been more difficult to treat than the image dilemma.
BB
Anonymous wrote: Your ... ellipsis at the end of your first paragraph conveniently omits the remainder of the sentence in Time: "all of whom have largely shed their cult status in the U.S. and the U.K."
Uh, didn't we all know that? The point is that in 1996 France officially regarded WCG as a dangerous cult. Obviously the US and UK had no such "black list."
Gavin,
You should read the Time piece once again. The context of the remark about the WCG is France's intolerance towards religion and not any illusion to the WCG as a cult.
Although I like some of what is on your site, sometimes I think Ambassador Watch is more of a cult than WCG ever was!
Corky, dear boy, your neck is obviously sunburned.
Remember the French Revolution - and the disestablishment of the Catholic church? They were the first old bean.
Joan of Arc? Old chap, the whole world was wallowing in superstition. Those Salem witch trials came much later.
My dear old sausage, did you realise that Europe collapsed in the Hitler era - not just France. But you omit the heroic French Resistance.
"Hmmmm. Where were the French in Afghanistan? In Iraq?" Staying well away from Baby Bush's foreign adventures and sagely noting how Dubya lied about weapons of mass destruction I expect.
"Hey, and what happened to the French when the US went in to help them in the Vietnam fiasco - you guessed it, they turned tail and ran like a whipped dog."
Again, dear boy, they knew a lost cause when they saw one. Alas, the US did not.
"Can't blame 'em though, cowardness is just part of the French nature."
Cowardness. A new word created by this most erudite political analyst. I'd stay to palaver, but I must drop the chaps at the Shorter Oxford the news of your triumph.
By the way, old chum, you wouldn't be a Republican supporter would you?
Tally ho!
Another (?) &*^%# "anonymous" wrote: "I think Ambassador Watch is more of a cult than WCG ever was!"
Yeah? Okay, so where are the tithes you lot owe? Nope, if this were a cult there'd be precious few comments - or maybe none (Thiel style), I'd be a lot wealthier, and you'd be disfellowshipped.
Hmm...
Too bad that the French don't recognize troublesome large cults like Islam and treat them like the social menace that they are.
The French are probably afraid that they'd get more of their junky French Renaults and Citroens (which they try to pass off as automobiles, he he he) overturned and burned in the streets if they say anything about those “wild donkeys.”
The WCG could have actually helped those snooty, low-class, French snail-eaters by teaching them the difference between classy food and their detestable slop that they should not even put on a plate, much less in their mouths.
On the other hand, considering some of the perverse things that come OUT of the mouths of the French and defile them, who cares what goes back IN.
"wonder if God and Jesus had anything to do with making sure that on the eve of Pentecost (holy spirit signifying a change of era)"
Huh? Bit early for Pentecost yet.....
"Can't blame 'em though, cowardness is just part of the French nature."
Cowardness. A new word created by this most erudite political analyst.
--------------------------------
Yes, "cowardness" is a new word invented by yours truly. I didn't use "cowardice" because all french are not cowards and don't have the cowardice trait. Some who didn't have that trait would be such as the few of the underground resistance in WWII.
--------------------------------
"Hey, and what happened to the French when the US went in to help them in the Vietnam fiasco - you guessed it, they turned tail and ran like a whipped dog."
Again, dear boy, they knew a lost cause when they saw one. Alas, the US did not.
----------------------------------
But, maybe it wouldn't have been a lost cause if they had stayed. Their leaving encouraged the NVA and the VC that they could win if they held on long enough.
Once again the French Foreign Legion showed their true colors, yellow on yellow.
Corkers:
The French Foreign Legion is not manned by French nationals. It's mostly eurocrooks of other nationalness (add that to your lexicon.) Still, I am glad to see hatredness of the French is still in style somewhere.
The French, it must be said, told both JFK and LBJ that Viet Nam was a lost cause on the front end. So they are honest and up front in the cowardness department.
It should also be noted that the French failure in WWII wasn't brought about by an unwillingness to fight, but rather an investment in poor defense technology. Only the Poles made worse choices. (The Poles upgraded cavalry as opposed to investing in mech.) No amount of bravery on the part of the French or Poles would have made one whit of difference against the Blitz.
But keep up the invective! What's next? Anti-Dutch rantings?
Mark Lax
Moreover, the problem with the modern French state has nothing at all to do with cowardness but rather that they are only slightly more solvent than Italy. Of course, in this brave new world order, national solvency is a matter of relative terms.
Mark Lax
French Supporter
PS: The French did defeat Greenpeace. That has to count for something.
Max Lax saith . . .
"The French, it must be said, told both JFK and LBJ that Viet Nam was a lost cause on the front end. So they are honest and up front in the cowardness department."
-------------------------------
By JFK and LBJ it was too late. It was Truman who got us into Vietnam.
Sure, the French are real experts! They tolerate in their midst the most dangerous people on Earth, the world's largest Satanic cult, Islam. It contains fanatics who worship death, and think they can reach paradise by murdering others.
I don't believe we can really look to the French for any real direction in these matters.
"PS: The French did defeat Greenpeace. That has to count for something."
Well, that is certainly one thing to damn the French for...being a Greenpeace supporter myself.
I used to enjoy making fun of the French until they bravely rejected W's imperialist policies. Arrogant and vain, yes, many of them are. Just as many Americans are arrogant and ignorant. :-)
Do you actually know any Muslims Larry?
No, didn't think so.
We in the U.S. owe a major debt of gratitude to the French for their role in our gaining independence from Great Britain. When the British surrendered at Yorktown, the largest army on the field was French. And the ships preventing relief from reaching them were ships of the French Navy.
How quickly some forget.
Regarding Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq: it seems the French have demonstrated they have more sense than us. By a lot.
The Skeptic
Actually, Ned, I have known quite a few. And, I have traveled around the Middle East. Some Muslims are very nice people. But, they have been brain-washed in ways that ex-COGers cannot even begin to imagine.
It doesn't change anything I said.
Just read through these comment (Corky & all).
Wow - and some people call BI racist!!!!!
I really hate to say this, but I've got to agree with Q here; what, are you people going to be ordering up plates of "freedom fries" next??
Geez, you already escaped the cultic thinking of Armstrongism, why buy into the American media brainwashing of "Teh French are eeeeeeeeeevil because they didn't want to help us blow up the Middle East for NO GOOD REASON."
Oh, and excuse my comment earlier, I'm not keeping track of "the holy calendar" this year, so the early Pentecost caught me quite by surprise.
I have never really regarded the French government as anything any other nation on Earth could count on except to disagree with.
It matters to the French to matter.
Regarding WWII and the French: When the Phillipines were lost a few hundred Americans and a handful of Brits managed to escape via a small vessel and sail all the way to French Indochina (Vietnam) and presented themselves to the French Army there, which at the time was under the command of the Vichy regime. What did the French do? They exchanged salutes with the Americans and Brits and then promptly turned them over to the Japanese.
Not many of those men survived the war. Those who did have detested all things French the rest of their lives.
Regarding the French people: I have come to really admire them and would like my fellow Americans to pay attention to what the French do when their government does something that they don't like:
They go on strike and shut the country down.
Given that the Obama administration has largely turned into the third Bush term plus greatly accelerated spending, we might want to do the same thing.
Purple Hymnal said...
“I really hate to say this, but I've got to agree with Q here;”
No need to apologise PH, happy to have you on board.
And if we are agreeing on something, with our differing views, then it can’t fail but be right!!
But seriously, yes – I felt the anti-French sentiments were becoming distasteful. And that is coming from a Brit.
I never bought into changing the name of "french fries" to "freedom fries", as some right-wing oxycontin-soaked druggie nutcases insisted we do, here in the States.
Actually, my aversion to what the right-wing pundits spewed at the time goes further than that.
Questeruk said...
Just read through these comment (Corky & all).
Wow - and some people call BI racist!!!!!
___________________________________
Q, I was being a bit tongue in cheek. I have to admit that it is caused by all the hype about the French refusing to help in the ongoing Vietnam style war and people refusing to eat "french fries" etc.
But, seriously, British/Israelism is not only racist - it's wrong.
Charlie said...
Regarding WWII and the French: When the Phillipines were lost a few hundred Americans and a handful of Brits managed to escape via a small vessel and sail all the way to French Indochina (Vietnam) and presented themselves to the French Army there, which at the time was under the command of the Vichy regime. What did the French do? They exchanged salutes with the Americans and Brits and then promptly turned them over to the Japanese.
--------------------------------
A good thing to keep in mind! Also we might remember the French and Indian war back in the youthful days of America.
We could bring up the French ruling Mexico as a first step in conquering America too but I'll let that one go.
"But, seriously, British/Israelism is not only racist - it's wrong."
Have to side with Corky on that one, Q, but I suspect you knew that already. :-) Glad to hear your comments were aimed at deflating the American media brainwashing, Corkster, and Mel. :-)
Ah, mon cherie,
FRANK-LY,the French are indeed the WEIN-land of Europe.
At times they can be a PAGNE,not CHAM, but REAL.
They consider themselves a cut above everyone else, which point DR GUILLOTINE proved from 1789 onwards.
And,of course,they regard themselves ze non pareil when it comes to matters of the heart.Louis the XIV,the "Sun King", was considered by many to be a good king,that is a "BON" king which of course is part of the French ethos.
Whilst the "Jacques" culture helped disestablish the Roman Catholic church,nevertheless,France is still solidly behind Rome.Richlieu saw to that; read of his exploits at La Rochelle.
Does Reuben indeed frequent that land in these latter days?Who knows?
Pierre
Maybe Ned will appreciate this. From today's Weekly Standard:
"This helps explain the extensive, tacit acceptance of monstrous and suicidal violence directed at civilians--at "heretical" Muslims as well as Christians and women. What kind of faith, we are entitled to ask, sanctifies acts of savagery as a religious duty? What sort of "Arab League"--of which Egypt is a member--embraces Sudan's Islamist dictator whose genocidal campaign has taken the lives of a quarter million non-Arab Muslims? What do we make of a religion that rejoices at the video images of hostages tortured and beheaded? Acid thrown into the faces of girls going to school, bombs exploding at weddings and soccer fields, children used as pawns in suicide attacks, unveiled women burned alive, the bodies of young boys mutilated--what explains this demonic cast of mind?"
I have actually already answered that question in my previous post. And the answer is not rhetorical, although the question might have been.
For redfox712:
"A troublesome religion, like Armstrongism." Youbetcha. And how about Roman Catholicism, Church of England Protestantism, Mormonism, Karaite and Lubavitch Judaism, Radical Islamism, Younameitism. What's the point here?
Jesus, if he had a pre-existence, must have chosen Judaism, because he was born into it, studied it enough to wow the machers at the Temple just before his Bar Mitzvah. But throughout his short young adulthood he spent an inordinate amount of time bellyaching about certain features of his chosen religion.
With all this religious bowel-churning, why do we hang on so tight to religion? Perhaps it's because we are indeed part spiritual, and the spiritual side cries out for nourishment. It's got to be out there somewhere, valid and eminently worthy. And wherever it is, someone's going to be bellyaching. The question seems to be, which bellyaches matter, and which don't.
Perhaps Time Magazine should be the final arbiter...
"....why do we hang on so tight to religion?"
Exactly. Religion is man made. It's a box. Unfortunately, you can be religious, and still not have a personal relationship with God. Forest to trees blindness, if you will.
BB
Post a Comment