Comments on Ambassador Watch: A True History of the Not-So-True Church (Pt.3)

Interesting stuff, Byker. No way you got all that...

2009-07-23T17:42:18.405+12:00

Interesting stuff, Byker. No way you got all that from Armstrongites. I'm encouraged. All the best!

Good points, Anonymous. I pointed out examples of...

2009-07-23T05:47:22.322+12:00

Good points, Anonymous. I pointed out examples of Yahweh's grace to Robert in one of my recent posts.

Most people from the WCG background seem to be completely unaware of Noahide law, or Noahide tradition, a factor of which the Jerusalem Council was apparently well versed. Either that, or the COGgers deny that there ever was such a thing as Noahide law.

HWA's British Israelism adaptation served him well in many ways, although it is a false and unprovable theory. By making us all into Israelites, he placed us under Mosaic Law in the same way as those of the Jewish persuasion find themselves by genetic heritage.

BB

Byker, I don't think God, Moses, Jesus or anyo...

2009-07-22T13:31:23.958+12:00

Byker, I don't think God, Moses, Jesus or anyone properly within the continuum of Godly teachings, from Adam forward, ever intended that non-Israelites (or non-Jews as we call them today) be obligated to the terms of covenant between God and Israel.

Mr. Armstrong unfortunately knew of no Biblical distinction between Jews and non-Jews, and therefore sought, mightily, to merge Paul with Jesus and James. Such a merger can't work. There have been two distinct lifestyles in existence, both of them equally moral, ethical and acceptable to God, from the time of Moses forward. Of course there is no superiority or inferiority between Jew and Greek, bond or free, male or female. But there is a difference in job description. And for anyone who wants the extra burden, he or she is welcome to accept the Israelite covenant and become Jewish -- but why?

Brits drive on one side of the street; Yanks drive on the other. Who is to say one tradition is better than the other? So it is between Jews and Gentiles, except that Jews are a Kingdom of Priests, and are obligated to maintain a priestly culture, which is the purpose of the covenant between God and Israel. Because most Israelites ignore the covenant, not even knowing who they are, the world is in one hell of an ungodly mess.

My guess is that this post will find few, if any, adherents, but the Protestant grace argument has never made sense IMO. A messianic kingdom without law is the height of absurdity in my thinking. When David was the royal messiah of Israel (anointed king) he was equally beholden to Israelite law as were the rest of Israel. So it is with all messiahs, whether royal, priestly or prophetic. Messiahs must fulfill the law, or be branded as outlaws.

Grace has always been with us because humanity is fallible -- but grace can never take the place of law, which must be learned and applied if ever the world will live at peace. For Jesus to have fulfilled the law is a fine example; he did precisely what every Jew lives to do, to fulfill the law -- in fact, to become a walking, talking example of responsible law-keeping. To learn this lifestyle requires grace, so God created it before he made Adam & Eve beholden to His commands. God created grace to make the development of Godly character possible. We have to crawl, and fall, even morally, before we can walk.

I can't imagine why people believe grace entered the human condition with Jesus. Are we all unaware of Psalm 51, its inspiration and consequences?

Thanks, and good post, Anonymous. I certainly agr...

2009-07-22T06:49:50.604+12:00

Thanks, and good post, Anonymous. I certainly agree with you that AC Bible classes were very simplistic.

I've learned that in order to interpret the writings of Paul, and to harmonize them with the Old Testament, one must use the Armstrongist/Adventist principle of "parsing" the law. Once one divides the law into various categories, one learns how to pick and choose, leading one to the conclusion that the sabbath, holydays, and clean and unclean meats are still in force for Christians today. IOW, Peter's dream, and Jesus statements regarding nothing one eats defiling one, can't mean what they seem to plainly state. Jesus' fulfilling of the law, and dying statement on the cross that "it is over" is not allowed to mean that Christians are totally under grace, as opposed to being required to keep "the law".

HWA was a master salesman, and his uneducated religous spin deceived many of us, turned some against God, and robbed us of what could have been a very rewarding and blessed Christian life for us and our families.

BB

Byker Bob wrote, "Armstrongism uses the most ...

2009-07-21T22:41:23.741+12:00

Byker Bob wrote, "Armstrongism uses the most ancient as criteria for judging the later. Mainstream Christianity uses the latest writings as a tool to understand what led to the present." This is a remarkable and accurate observation, or so it seems to me -- although the concept was never formally implemented at AC.

HWA constantly quoted God's words to Isaiah on his radio broadcast, before GTA became the main spokesman (8:20). "To the Law and to the Testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." And this is corroborated by Deuteronomy 13. Unfortunately, this perspective was never directly supported by the faculty or curricula at AC. If it had, our theology could not have allowed the D&R travesty.

I was taken aback when arriving at my first Freshman Bible class at AC, because both semesters were drawn from a harmony of the gospels. Not once did AC get around to anything approaching an in-depth study of Law and Testimony. An Old Testament Survey of one or two semesters had to suffice as our foundation, upon which, at least theoretically, the NT is built. How were we to judge the veracity of Biblical writings if we never probed the depths of "the law and the testimony"?

The definition RCM gave us of "the law" was the 10 commandments, inferred from James 1 and 2. But James also speaks there of bridling the tongue, loving one's neighbor, showing no respect of persons, quite a number of non-10 commandment directives, all drawn from the Torah (Genesis through Deuteronomy), which in fact is the "Law" we should have been studying.

During my tenure there I asked two ministers what "the law" was, and neither of them could answer me. One of them was Dr. Hoeh. Was that political correctness, or did he really not know? Never mind that Jesus' disciples would have been completely through the Torah and related Prophets about 7 times, with comprehensive discussions, agreements and disagreements, by the time they were 30. It was that way for every observant Jew, which those men were. There obviously was no NT during their lifetimes.

No one seemed to care about the tremendous and horrible gap AC students were unwittingly made to endure at God's own college. The Protestant Bible was God's inspired Word, and for God's chosen student body, Matthew was the starting point. But wasn't it Mr. Armstrong who often spoke of entering a movie too close to the end to get a context for evaluating the whole picture?

Tom, To me, the realities of Paul are what one pe...

2009-07-19T10:54:48.542+12:00

Tom,

To me, the realities of Paul are what one perceives when one reads the epistles without one's Adventist or Armstrongite sunglasses.

Robert touched upon the set of criteria which led to Armstrongism, when he expressed that one could only take seriously the ideas which Paul expressed that directly agree with what Jesus taught. This was in response to a discussion on the topic of grace. Robert seemed to feel that neither Jesus, nor the OT, taught grace.

WCG seemed to teach something which I call "reverse dispensationalism". In practice, this meant that the OT, and Mosaic Law, were weighted in such a way that they were to be used as the ultimate filter or harmonizing point for everything found in later books and chapters of the Bible, no matter what those later chapters plainly stated. In the epistle to the Galatians, Paul implies that this was the same type of thinking which blinded the Jews and Pharissees of his day to the teachings and freedoms of the New Covenant.

This is in contrast to the dispensationalist teachings of mainstream Christianity, in which it is believed that God has progressively revealed His truths to mankind, with the latest information having precedence over the earlier information.

That is, of course, my layman's digest of the topic, and based on my own personal study. I realize that you read widely, just as I do, so my opinion is obviously not going to have the same effect on you as would that of St. Augustine. But, what I have stated illustrates the key difference between Armstrongism, and mainstream Christianity. Armstrongism uses the most ancient as criteria for judging the later. Mainstream Christianity uses the latest writings as a tool to understand what led to the present.

BB

Byker Bob said... >>Perhaps HWA, on his dea...

2009-07-18T19:32:50.834+12:00

Byker Bob said...

>>Perhaps HWA, on his death bed, finally came to terms with the realities of Paul.<<

This comment suggests that you know something that we don't. What are "the realities of Paul?"

A case has been made that the Koran is a commentar...

2009-07-18T12:53:36.837+12:00

A case has been made that the Koran is a commentary on the Bible and we can only understand it if we read it alongside the Bible. Historical Islam is likely to be different than modern day versions of Islam.

The Christian Jewish faiths of Islam is one we do not usually consider because our own bias prevents us from studying any source outside of the scriptures.

BambooBends said: «If such were true - would peopl...

2009-07-18T11:15:02.196+12:00

BambooBends said: «If such were true - would people who call themselves Christian continue to live in the example Jesus set? Or do they need the threat of a Hell - (or in the Amstrongist case - eternal annihilation in the Lake of Fire) to do what is right, just and what leads to peace?»

The essence of Christianity should be whether you will do what you believe is right, even if no one (other than oneself and God) is looking. Having swallowed a «bill of goods» from a fear mongering salesman shouldn't even enter the equatian.

One thing has become painfully obvious. And, that...

2009-07-18T07:13:04.798+12:00

One thing has become painfully obvious. And, that is that we've allowed Armstrongism to define us as being Sardis, Philadelphian, or Laodecean. The reality is that we're the Galatians. We're the Romans, or even the Maccabeans!

In our era today, how are we any different from the Judaizing and Gentile Christian mix in Galatia? Are the problems in relating and getting along any different today than they were at the time when Paul wrote his advice to the Romans on the occasion of the return of the Jewish Christians who had been exiled from Rome?

Armstrongism did not accept either epistle as they had been written or were intended. You had to apply Armstrong modifiers to make Paul conform to the Old Covenant. This was bogus and contentious 2000years ago, and it has the same effect today!

I wonder if the Tkaches are in fact actually (gasp!) telling the truth when they state that the old man told Senior to correct the many doctrinal errors which had infected his church. Perhaps HWA, on his death bed, finally came to terms with the realities of Paul.

BB

Bamboo Bends said, "The question that is ne...

2009-07-18T05:00:37.601+12:00

Bamboo Bends said,

"The question that is never asked is: what if God does forgive? And what if all do live on after death (don't ask me to explain how that works). If such were true - would people who call themselves Christian continue to live in the example Jesus set? Or do they need the threat of a Hell - (or in the Amstrongist case - eternal annihilation in the Lake of Fire) to do what is right, just and what leads to peace."

Yes, BB, God does forgive. And Christians, even those of us in the former WCG, actually do CHOOSE to do what is right. And, we do not do it because of any existential threat of eternal annihilation! The Lake of Fire will be a merciful end for those who have CHOSEN rebellion and selfishness, that God wants to put out of their misery. And selfish people are very miserable.

We do it because it is proper, and we are motivated to try to make things better. Yes, this (for all you doubters) is an effect of God's Spirit.

Bamboo says, "The Jews did not and do not (by...

2009-07-17T18:53:17.593+12:00

Bamboo says, "The Jews did not and do not (by and large) believe in an afterlife. There is some indication of a belief in reincarnation in early Judaism. They asked Jesus if he was Elijah."

Not so, maybe so, absolutely so, Bamboo. The problem derives from the fact that "the Jews," at least in terms of uniform beliefs, don't exist.

One Jew, 2 synagogues. One to attend, the other to shun. We have Reform, Renewal, Reconstructionist, Orthodox, Modern Orthodox, Conservative, Traditional Conservative, Hassidic, and there must be others that don't come to mind.

Traditional Judaism, through the kabbalistic traditions, embraces an intricate version of reincarnation. And we accept the Torah as the instrument through which God imbues us with eternal life. We affirm this belief seven times during the Torah service every Sabbath day.

You can find this material at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13_principles_of_faith#Maimonides.27_13_principles_of_faith -- but you might be hard pressed to find two Jews of any stripe who accept everything, nay, anything, at face value.

"That concept wasn't formulated until tho...

2009-07-17T17:23:26.836+12:00

"That concept wasn't formulated until those writings attributed to Paul came into being."

actually that concept was formulated before the foundation of the earth....it wasn't understood until the Pentecost following Jesus' resurrection when the holy spirit was made available to the Church.

camfinch said... "Kung may wonder, but M...

2009-07-17T10:42:31.651+12:00

camfinch said...

"Kung may wonder, but Muhammad was not the "Jewish Christian apostle" in Arabian garb.

If this supposition was remotely true, the Koran would never have been written.

For the Koran denies the atoning sacrifice of Christ for the sins of the world.

Denies? Would you call also call the original 12 apostles denier's too?

That concept wasn't formulated until those writings attributed to Paul came into being.

The doctrines of forgiveness, redemption and the resurrection depends upon the atoning sacrifice of Christ."

Those are the Apostle Paul's attempts to attach mystical meaning to Jesus brutal death.

It assumes God does not forgive without blood being spilled. But then that was the time of the Roman Empire, a very bloody era.

I get the sense of Paul trying to integrate his upbringing in Jewish law, with his Greek mentoring and seeking to make sense of a great man dying a very ignoble death. It seems like something a righteous man shouldn't have to suffer unless there was some higher reason.

The question that is never asked is: what if God does forgive? And what if all do live on after death (don't ask me to explain how that works). If such were true - would people who call themselves Christian continue to live in the example Jesus set? Or do they need the threat of a Hell - (or in the Amstrongist case - eternal annihilation in the Lake of Fire) to do what is right, just and what leads to peace?

The Jews did not and do not (by and large) believe in an afterlife. There is some indication of a belief in reincarnation in early Judaism. They asked Jesus if he was Elijah.

The Ethiopian Orthodox Church is not Monophysite b...

2009-07-17T08:49:09.968+12:00

The Ethiopian Orthodox Church is not Monophysite but Miaphysite

camfinch said... TM>>"Kung may wonder,...

2009-07-17T04:57:54.422+12:00

camfinch said...

TM>>"Kung may wonder, but Muhammad was not the "Jewish Christian apostle" in Arabian garb. If this supposition was remotely true, the Koran would never have been written. For the Koran denies the atoning sacrifice of Christ for the sins of the world. The doctrines of forgiveness, redemption and the resurrection depends upon the atoning sacrifice of Christ."<<

Camfinch...

>>Perhaps Tom misses the essential point: "Jewish Christianity" did not see Jesus the Christ as a sacrifice for the sins of humanikind. He was a Messiah figure, which in Israelite terms, is a very different commodity altogether.<<

I am not sure that I have missed "the essential point." Christianity, whether it be Jewish or Gentile is predicated upon the atoning sacrifice of Christ, and its related doctrines. To reject, deny or remove the atonement from Christianity would divest it of its substance.

>>>Muslims see Jesus as perhaps the last of the true prophets before the "seal of the prophets" himself, Muhammad.<<<

But Jesus was more than a prophet. In fact, he was and is the son of God, an apostle, high priest and king.

And the idea that Muhammad was the "seal of the prophets" is simply arid nonsense! For Jesus brought the final revelation from God the father. Anyone who came after Jesus claiming that he was sent by God is a heretic. But please don't tell me that Paul came after Jesus claiming he was sent by God, for Paul preached the revelation that was given to Jesus.

The only religion that provides a solution to death is Christianity, because Christ rose from the dead! But, of course, I don't mean the kind of Christianity that Catholicism and Protestantism have proclaimed to a deceived world.

When the whole world is Islamic, will the Sunnis a...

2009-07-17T03:15:02.235+12:00

When the whole world is Islamic, will the Sunnis and Shiites still be killing each other?

Are there any real Christians in existence, Scottish or otherwise?

Is Jesus really the "saviour of the world" or just the saviour of a select few?

Does any of it matter if Genesis 3 is only an allegory?

If Jesus died for the first Adam as the last Adam, doesn't that remove the death penalty for sin from everyone?

Did Jesus say that we are judged according to our doctrines and beliefs or did he say we are judged according to our deeds?

So many questions, so little time.

I must say, this Tom Mahon character who writes on...

2009-07-17T02:19:18.191+12:00

I must say, this Tom Mahon character who writes on this site has the most amazing ability to say so little of real value using so many words. Yet he seems to take himself seriously, even if nobody else does.

What a moron. An obvious disciple of Armstrongism!

HWA started by conflating the Old and New Testamen...

2009-07-16T15:08:29.218+12:00

HWA started by conflating the Old and New Testaments. He took two things which were holy in their rightful contexts and made an unholy brew (the theme of the book of Galatians). This addition of one holy thing to another holy thing and producing something unholy is a barrier beyond which most Armstrongites cannot exceed.

After The Great Conflation, HWA reviewed church history (I am postulating here) and found that the only period of the church where this conflation seem to be accommodated was the Jerusalem Church or early Jewish Christianity.

But since that period was short-lived, he developed the theory of the true church going underground for 18 and a half centuries to re-emerge at the end of the age in the form of the WWCG and through the special personage of HWA.

It is amazing how someone can start with a mistake and develop it into an idea that sounds plausible. But hiding under many ornamental layers is that little hard, steely nucleus of undeniable error.

-- Neo

"Kung may wonder, but Muhammad was not the &q...

2009-07-16T14:45:44.244+12:00

"Kung may wonder, but Muhammad was not the "Jewish Christian apostle" in Arabian garb. If this supposition was remotely true, the Koran would never have been written. For the Koran denies the atoning sacrifice of Christ for the sins of the world. The doctrines of forgiveness, redemption and the resurrection depends upon the atoning sacrifice of Christ."

Perhaps Tom misses the essential point: "Jewish Christianity" did not see Jesus the Christ as a sacrifice for the sins of humanikind. He was a Messiah figure, which in Israelite terms, is a very different commodity altogether.

Muslims see Jesus as perhaps the last of the true prophets before the "seal of the prophets" himself, Muhammad.

And by the way the Qur'an/Koran was not written down until some decades after Muhammad's death in 632 C.E. It was actually a gradual process, much like the writing of the books canonized as the New Testament.

Oh, right, the one who tried to get the Internet s...

2009-07-16T14:11:06.176+12:00

Oh, right, the one who tried to get the Internet shut down. A bit before my active participation days, but I've read the horror stories.

Try this site for controversy. http://www.darrellw...

2009-07-16T13:54:48.794+12:00

Try this site for controversy. http://www.darrellwconder.com

you folks are fun. totally misguided, but fun :-) ...

2009-07-16T11:36:05.468+12:00

you folks are fun. totally misguided, but fun :-)

Just another Camera Angle brother.

Actually, I believe that it was our old nemesis Wa...

2009-07-16T08:01:40.350+12:00

Actually, I believe that it was our old nemesis Wade Cox who came up with a curious mixture of ACOG "restored truth" and Islam!

BB

"I've never bothered trying to work out w...

2009-07-16T07:17:06.491+12:00

"I've never bothered trying to work out what Ritenbaugh thinks - though I'd be surprised if he teaches this."

I'm not entirely certain, but I vaguely remember reading somewhere on one of the ex- sites, that there was a Mythter with a micro-splinter, who had taken his flock "whole hog" (hah) into Islam, using rhetoric based on some of the conclusions drawn above.

Not that's it of any import me; I've definitely evolved out of the Abrahamic tree, personally speaking.