Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Living Church of God Suspends Member Telling Him That LCG HQ Leaders Are More Intelligent Than He Is




From the Silenced blog where they are keeping track of the rapid decline of the Living Church of God:


Well it’s official. I received a letter, e-mail and text from my congregational Pastor on Friday, March 29th, 2015 informing me that I’ve been “suspended” from attending Sabbath services with the Living Church of God because I believe that the ordained ministers of the Living Church of God believe, practice and teach as doctrines some ideas that are clearly the commandments and traditions of men (Mark 7:6-9 ESV) or as the letter states, “You have made it obvious in your writings to Charlotte that you consider us to be following a false prophet and heretic, Mr. Armstrong, who was inspired to restore most all of our fundamental doctrines. Accordingly you write that we, ministers who preach and teach these inspired doctrines, are preaching prophetic heresy. You also accuse us of not preaching the broadly accepted Nicene family’s trinity fable. You are therefore being suspended from attendance with a church that you feel is heretical.”

Never mind that the Pastor who wrote the letter would consistently avoid answering questions and provide any evidence at all that would support the claims that he made against information that I shared with the LCG ministry, and would use all sorts of fallacious argument tactics to try to prove that LCG’s claims and ideas were correct and my view points were false.

Types of fallacious argument tactics used:

Attacking an Individuals Age: You’ve only been alive for “X amount” of years and you think you know better than those who have been alive longer than you and have lived this way of life for “Y amount” of years or more?

Attacking Years of Experience: Our organization has been around for “X amount” of years and you think that in your “Y amount” of years as a member of this church organization that you know more?

Position of Authority:If you are in disagreement with the Ordained Church Leaders of this church organization, then you are in disagreement with God!

It was clear that things had to go this pastors way or the highway. He has also done this to others in our congregation.

Leo

40 comments:

Anonymous said...


“You have made it obvious in your writings to Charlotte that you consider us to be following a false prophet and heretic, Mr. Armstrong, who was inspired to restore most all of our fundamental doctrines. Accordingly you write that we, ministers who preach and teach these inspired doctrines, are preaching prophetic heresy. You also accuse us of not preaching the broadly accepted Nicene family’s trinity fable. You are therefore being suspended from attendance with a church that you feel is heretical.”


Notice the part where the LCG minister wrote that they got “most all of our fundamental doctrines” from HWA. What does he mean by “most all”? Did not quite all of the “fundamental doctrines” of the LCG come from HWA? Did RCM slip in something major and fundamental (and double-curse worthy), like messing with the true gospel of the kingdom of God, for example? Have other RCM-described “non-fundamental doctrines” come in now from other sources? Have other RCM-described “non-fundamental doctrines” of HWA's been shown the door and given the boot? That disfellowshiped goof needs to realise that if he wants to remain in the LCG, he must go along with RCM's doctrinal changes, and at the same pace as RCM makes them, and must not come up with his own doctrinal changes.

This sounds like the goof who was shown the door and given the boot wanted to change all the teachings of the LCG, and now whines that the LCG finds it easier to kick him out rather than adopt all his own crazy theories. Of course it is easier for the LCG if such goofs go and find other churches that they agree with, rather than have the entire LCG change to try to agree with the numerous goofs out there—and I do mean “out there”. The goof will find sympathy only in the dictionary, or from other doctrinally unsound goofs like himself.

Byker Bob said...

Inconsistency and arbitrary enforcement and punitive measures breed these types of situation.

Weird doctrines attract offbeat people who are often difficult to control or manage. The ministers are simply fellow attracted weirdos only on a higher level of the report structure.

There is only one central thing that is all important and all consuming in an ACOG. And, that is authority. Watch out when the weirdos have it and try to exercise it!

BB

Anonymous said...

Great to see the church doing it's job and getting rid of those who are trying to divide it! You mention the church is in demise when in actual fact it is growing very steadily and doing a mighty work worldwide. You should learn to tell the truth.

We in the church don't follow any man, no matter who it is but we are lead by Christ and the bible teachings Christ taught, so please don't put our (the brethren)inteligence down just because you don't agree with the truth.

You seem to think we cant decide for ourselves and that you need to decide for us, REALLY, I'm afraid no one is going to listen to people who are only good at pointing fingers and putting others down because they think they have all the answers and think we cant think for ourselves; big mistake.

Every denomination has those who have left and then gripe and complain unfortunately.

Anonymous said...

A sure sign of whether these "churches" are anything approaching "true" or not: dwindling membership means LESS money, yet we are constantly reporting the ways they force people OUT! Bob's comment about "authority" FIRST is correct - the authority will have held its place, and proudly, even as the lawmen are executing the court order to seize furniture because payments haven't been made.

Since the beginning of ol' Herbert's creation of this myth of "knowing" more, there was time to time an "ignorant layman" who sought to show others that "God can give me insights, too!" David ben Arial (né Hoover), whom I knew, made statements to me that he was just like Herbert and had things people needed to hear -- ought to WANT to hear, and would be better "Christians" (Armstrong acolytes) because they could hear David expound. Poor slob ended up being a 1-person splinter, posting his "truth" online amidst his complaints that no one really understood HIS special mission from God. And so we have the other souls we observe here who buy a webcam to tell us there's NOWHERE ELSE they can hear "truth" quite like they have for us.

Wrong, guys! We've heard it all before!!!

Anonymous said...

Length of time doesn't create wisdom. Sometimes it just means that people have been stupid for a very long time

Anonymous said...

Annon 4:15 says, "We in the church don't follow any man, no matter who it is but we are lead by Christ and the bible teachings Christ taught, so please don't put our (the brethren)inteligence down just because you don't agree with the truth." (With the word "intelligence" misspelled BTW).

Just so you know anon, there are many of us who believe "the truth" but don't condone the behavior that Mr. Meredith and Mr. McNair have been engaging in. If a member is going off track the ministry should try to help them if they are following Christ's example. Right now it is questionable that LCG is "following Christ". Again, this has nothing to do with doctrine but everything to do with Christian character and Philadelphia love (or lack thereof).

Many of us want to see the church grow and do an even greater work but worry that everything is going to fall apart because the men at the top don't practice what they preach. I think you are confusing the two.

Black Ops Mikey said...

Anyone who recognizes that Herbert Armstrong was a false prophet and a heretic is far more intelligent than the clowns who disfellowshipped him.

How stupid is that?

Anonymous said...

Haha, 4:15:

"Great to see the church doing it's job and getting rid of those who are trying to divide it!"

Yeah, that's the job of a church. Good one.

Anonymous said...

Anon 4:15 says "Great to see the church doing it's job and getting rid of those who are trying to divide it!" It seems to me that if this were truly the case, the first who should be tossed out are sitting at the very top. The leadership is causing great division in the organization with their attitudes toward the brethren, pushing "upgrades" to teachings, and not being able to prove these upgrades (just expecting members to swallow the upgrades), using politics to promote one member over another, or cover the sins within their own families, the list goes on. God is a God of mercy and wants unity. However, that unity is not at the cost of truth and righteousness. There is no humility among the leadership in Charlotte. There is no love for the brethren - only constant oppression and an enthusiasm for tossing out those who happen to have an issue, or even a question. Jesus Christ said a true shepherd would leave his flock to go after the one lost sheep. These men do nothing of the sort. Case in point, the letter posted on this blog, and the handwritten note provided by church leadership.

Redfox712 said...

LCG HQ leaders are not more intelligent then that disfellowshipped man.

LCG teaches many things as fact when they are simply not true.

Meredith often says the following nonsense on his Tomorrow's World telecast, "You will gain precious insights and information available nowhere else."

Never mind that there are hundreds of related COG groups that teach essentially the very same thing as Meredith.

RSK said...

A mighty work worldwide... yet LCG keeps commenting that hardly anyone has heard of Herbert Armstrong, much less Rod Meredith or the teachings each one espoused.

Anonymous said...

Even having grown up in "the church" I find it odd that ministers expect and demand to be treated with a respect and reverence usually reserved for celebrities, the wealthy, or the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.

Because why? Because they've learned how to play the arrogance card?

The only skill they might have are in the area of sales and presentation. They're not doctors or scholars and don't possess any special intelligence, they don't make much money, their bad behavior surely makes them further from any potential deity than your average laymember, and they're incompetent executives with little or no power. They don't even seem to have much of a work ethic, so far as I can tell. What's so impressive or respectable about them?

And what's funny is, after they've spent 10, 20, 30 decades or more telling you everything (they think) they know, they still think you don't know any of it. What's ironic is, they don't know anything! Even those things they think they know, don't count as knowledge, because they're not even true.

What they are is cops. They're enforcers whose job is to look after the local interests of the corporation and keep the money flowing in. They're not there to look after your interests. Any service they do render is imaginary, such as an hour of nonstop falsehoods from the pulpit, or annointings, which have zero medical efficacy, all of which is propaganda to keep people tied in to the corporation.

Funny thing is, I've heard that unless you're reporting a crime, you should basically never talk to cops, because very little good can come from it, but there's a lot of potential for bad. Instinctively, I never wanted to counsel with a minister, so I basically never did. I've always kind of kept my distance from most ministers, and I think this is one of the big reasons why. There's just not much good that can come from it, only potential for needless hassles, such as what the Scarboroughs are dealing with. Not saying they brought that on by talking to the minister's too much, just, look at how the church cops looooove to hassle you.

Anonymous said...

4:15 ~ 'A rhombus, 'a bombus, a baby zombus!

Nice cliches. Too bad they bear no resemblance to truth.
Once some piece of personified excrement succeeds in deceiving you to the effect that his doctrines and teachings are actually Jesus Christ's, it is no longer permitted that you could think on your own. How's that British Israelism prophecy stuff (expiration date 1975) working out for you?

~Miguel de la Rodente

Anonymous said...

It amazes me how people freed from the shackles of Armstrongism can remain such pop culture zombies as those who frequently pontificate on this blog.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:20... You obviously must be including yourself.

Anonymous said...

I wasn't trying to change all the teachings of LCG. I was trying to show them specific ideas that they believe, practice and teach as doctrine are in fact the commandments and traditions of men which are causing LCG to disobey God and pervert the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I have no theories of my own that I want them to adopt. I just wanted them to stop believing and teaching ideas that are Non-biblical. If holding them to their own words "check up on me" and "don't believe me, believe your Bible" makes me a goof, then so be it.

LEO

Anonymous said...

Leo why go to a church whose doctrines offend you?
Go to the Catholic or Protestant churches. There are tons of them around that will love to hear what you have to say to their congregations. Except they won't since congregants preaching to other congregants is often seen as sowing discord.
Become a Buddhist Leo. You' ll be in your element.

Byker Bob said...

Many groups over the millennia have taught the sabbath, the holy days, clean meats, the ten commandments, and either a tithe or voluntary giving of a generally recommended percentage of 10% as God's basic standard.

People have been happy, they've lived exemplary lives, and they have raised fine families in peace and tranquility under those customs. Whether they are New or Old Covenant, whether certain facts are known or unknown that would make it possible or impossible to still observe those tenets, and whether the act of teaching them is the way of identifying "God's True Church" rather than love, faith, and other Christian fruits, has been the subject of ongoing unresolvable debate for many years. Still, a once a week "special date with God" would certainly not harm self, or others, in and of itself.

What elevated Herbert W. Armstrong's church and his heirs into cultic status was the addition of an extrabiblical theory (which can actually be disproven using the Bible, let alone archaeology, history, linguistics, and genetics) based on British Israelism and German Assyrianism. This was compounded by Armstrong's pretentiousness in claiming to know something that Jesus said could not be known, I.e, when the end would come. Now, that is all cultic "gnosticism", but it doesn't yet rise to the label "toxic".

Toxicity entered through Herbert using the apocalyspe of Revelation, bolstered by the prophecies of Daniel, asserting that these would occur during our lifetime, applying it all to civilizations initiated by Anglo-Saxon gentiles, and leaving anyone from his primary broadcast audience who wanted to be spared and protected from these with the sole alternatives of joining his church movement, or suffering the brunt of the tribulation. It was a black and white ultimatum. He then introduced another bit of speculation, that the churches enumerated in Revelation were actually eras, thus branding anyone more liberal or conservative than himself who actually taught the same doctrines as "Sardis" or "Laodicean". Some over the years have considered all of this intimidation to be special, privileged truth, while in the face of continued failure of the root prophecies, and witnessing horrible fruits, others have seen it as blatant, deliberate, false entrapment.

The final and worst toxicity came from Herbert's doctrine of "government from the top down" (rather than the power of Jesus Christ converting and transforming one Christian heart at a time from the bottom-up), thus opening the door for all of the cruel, arbitrary, "our way or the highway" enforcement practiced in original WCG and the ACOG splinters. Basically, this is the "we OWN you" doctrine, making the leaders of these groups the gatekeepers to the so-called "place of safety" and supposedly to the kingdom itself. Members in good standing do not question their gatekeepers' authority!

I have no problem with the people who think that the New Covenant is simply the Infusion of Jesus into the Old Covenant. But, I have a huge problem with the people who would contaminate all of that with the various ingredients that Herbert W. Armstrong added as his own modifiers to that. The use of a special set of Armstrong gnosticism, combined with totalitarian enforcement, is what makes the ACOGs toxic. That is in no way spiritual guidance.

BB

Anonymous said...

LEO,

Allow me to explain how things are done in the so-called “Church of God” splinter groups. Typically, some self-appointed leader comes up with all the teachings. All the little people are supposed to go along with all the teachings. Changes to teachings come about only if and when it suits the leader. To attract former members of the Worldwide Church of God, these leaders often claim to be teaching the same things that Herbert W. Armstrong had taught. Then, these leaders go on to come up with many horrible heresies. They start off by saying that they are just building upon what HWA had taught. Over time, though, they somehow always manage to totally warp and change virtually everything in the most outrageous ways. By then, the little suckers are feeling trapped.

Be thankful that at least you were not in something even worse than Roderick C. Meredith's Living Church. Sure, RCM is always trying to slip in major doctrinal changes that he claims are not really doctrinal changes at all, and likes to drone on and on about how HWA would have wanted him to grow in knowledge and make all these doctrinal changes, and would be pleased with him and his doctrinal changes, which he supposedly is not making. Tragically, though, disagreeing with RCM's sneaky doctrinal changes can get people into even worse trouble with even worse leaders. For example, David Pack accused RCM of not believing that HWA was Elijah, and of secretly desiring to be the Elijah himself. After DCP got fired from RCM's old Global Church (the now dead predecessor to RCM's current Living Church), he started his own Restored Church.

People in David C. Pack's Restored Church were recently required to hand over everything they own to the RCG and have “all things common” (actually, “all things Pack's”). Since Herbert W. Armstrong had never taught this idea, David Pack reasoned that HWA had obviously not restored all things, and therefore could not have been the one who was prophesied to come in the spirit and power of Elijah to restore all things as HWA had claimed to be. So, after requiring RCG members to believe for the first 14 years of the RCG's existence that HWA was Elijah, DCP suddenly required everyone in the RCG to totally change their beliefs in early 2015 and believe that HWA was Moses and that DCP himself is Elijah. Old RCG writings that had attracted people suddenly got edited or even totally deleted. To make sure that the RCG members enthusiastically played along and humored big-headed psycho Dave Packman (the “devourer”), he ranted and raved, yelled and spit, and shouted that if they don't go along with this doctrinal change it is because they are “idolaters.” RCG members might have thought that after DCP's August 31, 2013 Haggai/Zechariah prophetic guess totally failed he would have smartened up a little bit and been more careful about the stuff he makes up. They would have been wrong. DCP is spiralling downward, not soaring upward.

Interestingly, and sadly, many of the little people in and out of these groups and others are also full of nutty ideas of their own that are just waiting for an opportunity to burst forth. It obviously is not the Holy Spirit leading them either, since they come up with all sorts of different, contradictory ideas too. Listening to all the different ideas of all the little goofs out there could be an endless and thankless task. This is why, in spite of all the wicked leaders on the so-called COG scene today and all their heresies, carelessly believing every little goof out there is not necessarily the answer either. Of course, every little goof out there will think that he is right, and that it is obvious, and that he has proof. But keep in mind that even bigger goofs like DCP think that they are even more right, and more obviously so, and can come up with literally dozens of so-called “proofs” for all their new ideas and prophecies that still fail anyway in spite of the dozens of “proofs” for them.

Minimalist said...

He calls himself Doctor Meredith?
And yet he believes in the Racist, Disproven Anglo-Israel Theory?

We must warn people about his kooky Cult!

RSK said...

I can't weigh Leo's proposals as I dont know what they are; the response letter cited above only mentions them in a brief, possibly hyperbolic fashion. The post is really more about the fallacies of relevance employed.

Anonymous said...

With corruptions and people abuse in the church and in the world , there is one rule to decipher them, "Follow the money". It was money that corrupted HWA and it is still money that his so-claiming follower/leaders (Flurry, Pack, Meredith, Kubik, Hulme and all cog leaders) that they are all pursuing (5-star lifestyle) still and the reason for battering the members of their groups. Tithes they teach belong to God but they receive them and enjoy spending them which leads them to think that they are blessed and approved of God and they become the little gods.

Anonymous said...

Byker Bob suggested that he has no problem if people want to observe some of the rules and customs of the Old Covenant. I agree. The problem with HWA was that we MUST, as a means of salvation or of demonstrating their true, living faith. SDA and COG people can do what they want, but don't tell me that I must do it your way, also. While attending Emmaus Bible College (after AC) an instructor suggested that if a legalist tells you what you should do (pray for 30 minutes a day, read your Bible in the morning, etc), just toss the idea back at him but raise the stakes. "Why not pray for one hour, 'Don't you love God enough to spend an hour on your knees?'" This usually shuts them up since they think that their standard must be yours, also. The WCG concept of "church" is all wrong, I believe. It is not an organization, but an organism, the Body of Christ, made up of ALL who believe. The church government with apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers, etc. is not a military structure from the top down, more like all standing side by side with the Apostle moving into a territory first, then followed by the others. It is a sequence, not hierarchy. What do you think?

Charles said...

What is his doctorate anyway and where is it from? Is it more valid than Dr. Thiel's?

Black Ops Mikey said...

Now explain to me just how this isn't all George Orwell's 1984?

Anonymous said...

Thiel has actually obtained a doctoral degree. Meredith has not. It was an "honorary" doctorate. Pride, ego and vanity are what drive the "Dr. Meredith" title. It hasn't been earned.

Anonymous said...

His doctorate is from AC. Is it valid? Of course not. HWA rewarded people for their loyalty to him, not for scholastic excellence. Besides, how could a high school drop out evaluate anyone's academic work?

Connie Schmidt said...

What should happen to a Living Church of God Baker who refuses to make a wedding cake for a disfellowshipped and marked LCG member ?

Inquiring minds need to know!

Byker Bob said...

Anonymous 3:49, In principle, I like your concept of raising the stakes, and throwing it back at the legalists. Unfortunately, with a certain percentage of the people attracted to Armstrongism, that could also end up going the wrong way. Such a technique of logic could end up creating another James Malm!

BB

Anonymous said...

Thiel has n accredited. He didn't earn it. Meredith's doctoral degree in is 'honorary'. He earned nothing. It's 100% vanity, ego and pride that would cause one to call himself dr when he's not done the work required for the title.

lnrd said...

How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? .+!

john 7:15

Anonymous said...

I believe the "doctorate" of Herman Hoeh was the same, an "honorary" one awarded by AC, and not earned.

Byker Bob said...

Unfortunately, at least as I understand it, once an institution becomes accredited, class credits and degrees become acceptable to other accredited institutions retroactively. IOW, if I wanted to go back to school, all of my AC credits would accumulate towards a degree at a real college or university.

The degrees of Meredith and Hoeh, as well as those of their colleagues, are still of questionable "provincial" value and do not accord the same standing as degrees from Ivy League or State universities. There is a hierarchy of value or pecking order to these things, in that the title "Dr." is far from generic. None the less, hypothetically, they could use these degrees towards obtaining valid doctorates which might carry some weight.

BTW, Uncle Roddy didn't use his doctor title while his uncle was alive because he didn't want to overshadow Dr. C. Paul's veterinary degree. Supposedly GTA didn't use his doctorate out of respect for his father who didn't have one. Or, these guys could have simply realized the real value of such degrees. GTA's thesis was the child beating booklet, and David Jon Hill's masters thesis was the Spokesman's Club Manual. You know, "Moses supposes his toeses are roses...."?

In a church movement where Hislop, and plagiarism passed for serious academics, what could someone honestly expect of the church's own proprietary colleges and grade schools?

BB

Anonymous said...

The doctorate degrees of Meredith and Hoeh were not honorary. They were awarded by AC after Meredith and Hoeh completed studies and papers, such as Hoeh's Compendium. AC was not accredited at the time the degrees were awarded. They may not have been worth much in the academic sense but it is misleading to say that they were honorary degrees awarded by AC.

Anonymous said...

Actually, the AC accreditation does not automatically make your degree/credits acceptable to other institutions if you graduated before accreditation. Some institutions MAY accept them if they were acquired within a certain window of time leading up to accreditation (five years is the most I've heard). Other institutions will NOT accept your credits at all unless you did it AFTER accreditation. If you are returning to a seminary, they have discretion under ATS regulation to accept up to 5% of their new students from non-accredited schools.
But a lot of AC grads have simply had to do some "additional" coursework before being accepted.

Black Ops Mikey said...

Could Herman Hoeh's doctorate be taken away posthumously because he deliberately and knowingly lied in the Compendium.

I'm thinking Karl-Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg.

(Hey, can I get a doctorate just for copying in his full name from Wikipedia?)

Anonymous said...

Meredith should be awarded a title as Pharisee in Chief. He says he knows God but does not the things Christ commands. He is one of the most hateful, vendictive men I've ever encountered. How people follow him i will never understand!

Anonymous said...

The Mormons have had an expression which says, "Once the decision has been made, the thinking has been done." In other words,"Shut up and sit down." Oh, and keep sending us money.

Anonymous said...

A few weeks ago I read the correspondence between Gary Ehman and a UCG member wherein Ehman had a condescending rudeness in his tone and basically told them to F off. Then I read the letter McNair and League wrote the Scarborough's that says we know you want to counsel but F off. The arrogance and hatefulness coming out of Charlotte is appalling. Is there anyone out there that thinks LCGs behavior personifies what Jesus would do???

Anonymous said...

I was in Big Sandy when AC was accredited and one of the deans told me that there is no such thing as retroactive accreditation. However, when many college registrars encounter an unfamiliar institution, they simply look it up in the current list of accredited institutions. If it's in the current list, they accept the student's credits without doing additional research. Many AC students and graduates got lucky and had all their credits accepted in this way.

Other registrars take the time to research when the institution was accredited and apply some rule to determine which, if any, credits they will accept that were earned before the institution was accredited. And so, as anon 6:46 said, some AC students had to retake some or all of their previous work.