Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Was the Church Inherently Racist?

Various Church of God apologists love to claim that the church was never racist at its core beliefs.  Almost-arrested Elisha, Elijah Habakuk, Amos Bob Thiel makes many such claims.  But all of them fail to take into account that the church and Ambassador College had written into its constitution racist ideas.  That constitution was greatly affected on the church believing in the erroneous myth of British Israelism and superiority of the white nations who were supposedly descendants of the 12 tribes, who as we all know, were pure lily white.

It was so obvious and bad that the City of Pasadena investigated the church/college in 1963.

"Incidentally, regarding the Anglo-Israel theory, none other than Garner Ted Armstrong, being interviewed by the Rev. Lester Kinsolving, a syndicated religious writer for the public press, when queried about it, smiled and replied: "It's a likelihood (British Israelism), but it can't be proved. It's an interesting aside.  We certainly don't regard this as a required belief, if that's what you're getting at."  When Kinsolving pointed out that in 1963 during an investigation of Ambassador College by the Pasadena City Attorney, it was learned that the school's constitution and by-laws, adopted in 1951, restricted the student body "to the race of Israel, whom we believe now to be the white, English speaking Anglo-Saxon and Celtic people, and the democratic peoples of Northwestern Europe, in addition to the Jews descended from the Kingdom of Judah", he said Armstrong appeared surprised and hurriedly said: "That must have been while I was in the Navy. It's been altered dramatically. We have no such restrictions." Armstrongism: The "Worldwide Church God" Examined in the Searching Light of Scripture, Sumner, 1974
There is an advantage of having a huge personal collection of books written about the Worldwide Church of God, Herbert Armstrong and Armstrongism over the last 70 some years.  Embarrassing facts are in print that can never be erased from the world no matter how much the lying false prophets of Armstrongism attempt to.


Anonymous said...

Well I never.......
Well "doubly blessed" Bob the facts speak for themselves.B I is patiently incorrect,indeed a simple reading of scripture should provide amble proof.And this theory did lay the groundwork for rednecks to flourish.Sadly.
Facts,darm facts,always in the way.
BI is the "fake news" of Armstrongism.
And the racism that sprang from it,an "inconvenient truth".

Connie Schmidt said...

Not just fascist against non-white races, but even against Germans like myself. Always being pigeon holed into the idea that you are of the "Assyrians" and "that your people are the ones that are going to bring about the END TIMES" etc, etc.

RSK said...

Oh boy. The moment you make a post containing the words "racist" or "racism", people show up in droves to get all defensive... for reasons I've never really understood.

Anyway, did WCG espouse racist policies and ideas? Certainly, from time to time. Given the period that it existed in, that was probably unavoidable to some extent. Despite its pretensions to the contrary, the Church bent to social norms of the time on multiple occasions and topics.

Were Herbert Armstrong, Garner Ted, Rod Meredith, Gerald Waterhouse, and a bunch of other highrankers racists? I didn't know any of them personally, but some of them certainly said or wrote racist things (some overtly, some probably thoughtlessly). What they thought or how they treated others directly, I can't say.

Was the BI doctrine racist? It can be cast that way, yes. WCG could have pressed that angle harder than it did, if they really wanted. Obviously, the posted quote indicates that they did sometimes pursue it along those lines.

Was the membership racist? No doubt there were some overt racists, some thoughtless, subconscious racists. Again, spanning the time period that it did, it'd be partly unavoidable. The entire membership? No. There have been idealists and careful, conscious thinkers the world over since recorded time, and there were doubtlessly some in WCG too.

Byker Bob said...


They reinterpreted and perverted the Bible based on the heirarchy of ethnicities created by British Israelism, projected all of it on to God (HWA: "God's way is the way of SEGREGATION!), and then blamed Him, while acting all innocent, pretending that they were just helplessly following God's way by being racists. They'd invoke their little characters to help things along, like Ham, Canaan, and Nimrod.

They were also very slow and resistant to correct those attitudes and abuses. They certainly didn't embrace or even accept Tom Bradley when he became the mayor of Los Angeles! You should have heard the sermons of that day! Sign of the end times, brethren. Our pride has been broken!

I will grant them one thing! In the WCG, slavery was an equal opportunity proposition. Anyone of any color could become a tithe slave. HWA owned a lot of slaves! Jesus emancipated a bunch of us by not showing up on HWA's prescribed date.


Anonymous said...

Yes, it was racist. It was firmly segregated when I was first associated with it in the nineteen fifties. I was there, so I know. Negroes were looked down upon as the sons of Ham and referred to as Canaanites.

Allen C. Dexter

Hoss said...

Anon 509: In addition, as Bob said he is not of BI heritage, he wouldn't have been admitted to AC if the 1951 provisions were enforced. Imagine if each AC applicant had been racially profiled to ensure they were had an "acceptable" ancestry!

RSK said...

And yes, I am attempting to be objective on this point, since unfortunately I deal with racism of both types on a pretty regular basis. And yes, I remember Rod Meredith's writeup of a prospective as "he is a typical Negro".

Anonymous said...

"...be the white, English speaking Anglo-Saxon and Celtic people, and the democratic peoples of Northwestern Europe, ..." yadda yadda yadda....

it was the same way at the Baptist Church I grew up in....so, what's your point??

nck said...

It would be extremely boring if I would fall into repetition. Pointing out the “H, Jackson’s” pastorate, HWA proudly posing with the basketball just received from “Magic Johnson”,

Then Martha’s would point to her excellent research on 1950’s PT articles not only reflecting the culture and time of the day but even be somewhat “conservative” or “regressive” in its therapy to solve mankinds problems.
Confronted with that I would turn and connect the dots of BI ideology and the people that conducted t he OKC bombing. Suddenly everyone turning and calling me “irresponsible” in making such claim.

It boils down to ones own experience I guess.

Some former WCG members on remote islands in the Philipines, Vanuatu, or Kenya not having a clue what those Americans are talking about on the blogs. And innercity black folk giving tale of their redneck minister from Texas spouting all kind of extra biblical interpretation that left them hurting for life.
Yes I have seen the South African SEP camps reflecting the local laws of seperation, Yes I have seen mixed British SEP reflecting the culture of that area, being called a breath of fresh air compared to the American camps.

In context I am readily prepared to see that a lot of the small farmers in the deep south may have worked their pants of right next to their slaves regarding them as “family” or at least co-workers in their hardships (as evidenced by many wills), while the slaves might just have had another interpretation of that same relationship.
There are also the Ivi League professors who never really touched a tool of labor besides their pens and wallow in the stripes received by their 1820 forebears. Actually sueing banks that have predecessors found wanting on certain transactions in 1810, whose predecessors are now contributing 0,000000000001 percent of the current profits. They sue the current 1995 born employees for millions many of those current employees being black.

nck said...

Now what does actually interest me in this blog article. If this article had been truly enforced. (and even the 2nd in command seems to have been embarassed with it in the early 1950’s) then indeed the door would have been closed for , Stavridinis, Antion, people hailing from Slavic, parents. (Mokarow type of name), perhaps the Hessians or, WestPhalia people, but not the Northern Saxon people. (Conny, Germans are 19th century fiction), of course the Jackson’s, perhaps the Armenian Mr Apartian and etc. And certainly those whose DNA would match with the ancient builders of Stonehenge et all some 2000 years before Celts or Saxons would even arrive on those hallowed shores.

The one thing I am most intrigued at is a professional one.
How would such article be judged in the current political climate. The current POTUS issues orders not having immigrants naming specific countries. The orders are largely received by millions as racist even calling a religion a race. I find this current legal battle very interesting to compare to the mentioned bylaw. Specific nations are mentioned. But it does not say Yes to Whites, No to Colored. According to the defenition in the bylaw even Hoeh would have had a hard time being accepted.


Anonymous said...

"If this article had been truly enforced...then indeed the door would have been closed for , Stavridinis, Antion, people hailing from Slavic, etc."

Do you remember Killary's public and private policies? They contradicted each other. Why? It was deliberately done to maximize votes. With Armstrong it was money. Deception is what they are best at.


Martha said...

Nah, NCK, not going back to the 1950s. Society itself was racist enough then for me to cast stones at a single institution.

Yeah, there were racists in WCG in my day. Saw some up close and personal. But it wasn't everyone, I recognize that. There were always black members in our congregations, some treated them well, some didn't. I assume it's still the case, because it's still the case in society in general today, unfortunately.

Martha said...


Lest you mistake my usual lack of verbocity for indifference...

Let me state that the racist actions of A FEW men I saw in WCG made a deep impression on me.
Just as the racist actions of A FEW individuals I saw in my American public school made a deep impression on me. Specifically, on the way issues of race are addressed in my own family.

Forgive me for not being more specific, as those who know me outside the walls of our friendly blog are familiar with my feelings and experiences on this issue.

Byker Bob said...

The thing is, in the WCG corporate culture, white minorities, or what we might call "conditional whites" were always accepted, and admitted to that inner club known as the ministry. This included some of the people to whom nck referred, Armenians, Italians, etc.

The ultimate tests involved what types of people were freely and fully admitted to Imperial Schools and Ambassador College, and when I use the term "freely", I mean without agenda. It really doesn't count when special exceptions are made to groom someone to be able to reach or minister to "their" people. When that happens, everybody knows that the exceptions are really still seen as being different, and not made full members of the club. The real litmus test as to full acceptance involves restrictions, or the lack thereof, in matters of marriage.

In the 1960s, I knew church members who had been put out for marrying Hispanics. That door began to open more fully, starting in the mid 1970s. However, I don't believe anyone even asked about black-white marriages, because it was implicitly understood during that time that such marriages were completely verboten, for nonexistent Biblical reasons. Even today, Gerald Flurry, who has also stuck with the original medical doctrines, actually breaks up interracial families as condition for continued church membership.

As a kindergarten teacher once pointed out to me, children are not innately racist. Without giving it second thought, they will freely play amongst their peers, despite differences. Racism is something that is taught. One expects much better from one's spiritual advisors or teachers than to have racism corporately taught and enforced. Spiritual leaders should be in the vanguard of recognizing and working to change evils.

It is not acceptable to say, "Well, that's just the way society was in those days!" There were enlightened ones working for change, yet Armstrongism was a holdout, one of the last to reluctantly adopt paradigm shift. The litmus test is, what would they do in the absence of outside societal pressure? I believe they'd still be stuck in Jim Crow.


Black Ops Mikey said...

It never ceases to amaze me that this topic comes up again and again -- we had this same discussion on Ambassador Watch awhile back -- and for most people was that No, the WCG wasn't racist, just a few of the people were. This is rubbish. The entire cult was galvanized to be racists and a few didn't engage in it. Connie is correct, the racism ran so deeply that those of German extraction (at the time, 75% of the United States population) were deemed to be lesser than the pure 'Israelites' as defined by the VERY racists British Israelism which, through its history presented an attractive platform for white supremacists, neo-Nazis and such. You can read the study of this in the history of British Israelism in "Kooks".

It gets worse, of course. Circa 1964-1965 in Seattle, Bill McDowell told the congregation that the Indians (Native Americans, for those of you who have not lived through the 1950s and 1960s) were a degenerate inferior race which those coming from the lost tribes of Israel in Europe were to wipe out: It was not just an entitlement, but it was a moral imperative. Native Americans were on the bottom of the social dung hill of Armstrongism, just below the Chinese and they were below the Blacks.

Some of the apologists for Herbert Armstrong claimed that he had never encountered blacks, to which I pointed out the Autobiography and his stint in the South to which the apologists said, "what's your point?". The point is that his experience there left him with disdain for what he called "Negroes" where he considered them inferior. This version of the Autobiography does mention 'Civil Rights' but that's the sanitized version and the original printed in the Plain Truth did not contain that. By the 1970s, the WCG HAD to change its policies because the Feds were pressuring them. Suffice it to say that when Michael Lord sang at the Auditorium, Herbert Armstrong referred to him as 'the Negro', not seeing him as a real person and certainly not seeing him as any kind of equal to the white trash running Ambassador College.

Yes, there was one, count them ONE, black man Evangelist: Harold Jackson. How he made it past the censors no one really knows.

The Cult of Herbert Armstrong Mafia still stands today as racist, sexist and homophobic. The only reason that they aren't anti semitic is because of their particular brand of British Israelism which is sort of a deviancy from the usual tripe.

There are those who put a financial incentive on British Israelism. Note from "The Occult Origins of the Bank of England" this entry:

"Another line of thought led to the doctrine of British-Israelism, which held that the British were the descendants of the lost tribes of Israel. The doctrine of British-Israelism and the Lost Ten Tribes was intended to forge a political alliance between the British monarchy and the Jews of Amsterdam, through a merger of the Arthurian Imperial tradition with Cabalistic interpretations of the Hebrew scriptures….

“To forge ties between Jewish merchants and British Imperialists, John Dee created the concept of British-Israel, which gave the British and the Jews a common racial identity, and invoked biblical prophecy to show the inevitable triumph of British Imperialism: the British, as Abraham's seed, were to inherit the earth. Dee also introduced the Jewish Cabala to the British ruling class and its interlocking network of European royal dynasties. All this set the stage for the later absorption of European Jewish merchants and bankers into British society…In essence, the dissemination of the British-Israel doctrine was an intelligence coup carried out by the British Monarchy.”

Perhaps Herbert Armstrong used British Israelism just to make money after all.

Anonymous said...

I think some here are being sloppy with the term racism. When people from different nations migrated to America, these nationalities clustered in certain parts of a city. Even people from northern Italy formed a different group from people that came from Southern Italy. This separation is normal. One gets maximum benefits from living within ones group. Everyone does. Talk of the holy spirit overcoming these differences is nonsense.
This phenomenon should be respected. It is not racism.

Sweetblood777 said...

If you are a Bible believer and don't believe in BI, then what do you do with Gen.49?

Connie, Germany is not Assyrian. It is a Nordic country which means they are our brothers. HWA did not come up with BI, he stole it, like he did many other beliefs, taking them from books at the library.

He was a fraud through and through, and if the Internet existed in those early years, he would not have got away with it.

RSK said...

Genesis 49? You note all the fulfillments later in the Bible. Let the Bible interpret the Bible instead of bringing in some nonsense fable based on tenuous river names and an appeal to nationalism to gloss over all the gaps.

I cannot speak for identification of members of German descent as "Assyrians" - the way I recall it, it usually came down to "if you're white, you're alright" in principle, biblical prophecy be damned. There was probably a rationale floating around for it along the lines of "if they are called = righteous" or something like that. HWA certainly doesnt seem to have had a problem with appointing a Russian as his successor... but would he have appointed a "Negro"? Better ask Aaron Dean about that.

As for we black brethren being singled out as "Cursed be Canaan", I remember some occasions of that. Not organization-wide (I probably came along too late to witness a lot of that), but certainly occurred.

Black Ops Mikey said...

If you are a Bible believer and don't believe in BI, then what do you do with Gen.49?

What you do with it, if you are a Bible believer, is to take it as it is written.

What it is, is an idea that Jacob had for the future of his sons based on his observation as a father. There is no indication at all that God issued this as prophecy.

What you don't do is assume that there is some magical mystical mapping of these words to the 21st century. In fact, if we were to take the tradition of the Jews, we have about 300 more years until the end of the 6,000 year period.

Furthermore, if you really are a Bible believer, you would absolutely NOT believe there are 10 lost tribes. Most of the tribes are accounted for in the New Testament and they were not lost. You WOULD realize that there are really two lost tribes, if you believe Revelation. Just two. Two of them gone forever as distinct entities.

And of course, you would not believe that Israelites today are white, but rather swarthy, like their genetic 'cousins', the Arabs. If, that is, you are a Bible believer and not some charlatan.

Moreover, you would reject the idea that the Queen of England descended from the line of King David. She's German. She's not anywhere near what apologists would claim as 'Ephraim' [or if you are really nuts, Manasseh]. No, you would look at Hosea and be horrified that if the British are really Ephraim, they are drunken boozing alcoholics condemned by God and rejected for all time as not even being mentioned in Revelation.

No, people who believe in the extra Biblical, thoroughly debunked British Israelism actually are NOT Bible believers. They are ancient Pagan Druids (long story), in a cult, committing idolatry by worshipping Herbert Armstrong and science fiction aficionados contemplating alternative world histories of the British Israelism worst science fiction ever.

All that may seem extreme and radical, but it is factual (the truth these days seems like it is just to crazy to believe, but it's still truth).

Then there's the problem of being a Bible believer. Is there any real proof that the Bible is God's Word? No. If the Bible were to be God's Word, God would be a manic depressive liar false prophet who commissions forged books written by Roman Catholics (at least the New Testament). Heck, the Jews themselves don't believe the Old Testament is literally true -- and they wrote the bloody thing. If God wrote the Bible, He's profoundly short sighted and doesn't seem to know how human nature works. The Yahweh seems to be exploring, trying to work out how the Universe works, with flashes of delusions of grandeur that often end up far different as predicted. Herbert Armstrong actually proved the Bible wrong in his booklet, "Proof of the Bible". I think Hoss or somebody could enlighten you (not sure which ones).

It's amazing how someone could fall for British Israelism hook, line and sinker in these days of stellar research tools available to us all.

Anonymous said...

In fairness, the Radio Church of God, like many other groups of the day, reflected the culture and law of the times. People sometimes forget that radical segregation was the U.S. Supreme Court-approved law of the law (see Plessy vs. Ferguson) up until the mid-1950s, when the Supreme Court reversed itself and handed down the Brown vs. Board of Education decision declaring public segregation to be unconstitutional. Back in 1896, while arguing that the Constitution was "color-blind," the one dissenting Justice (John Marshall Harlan) who went up against the 1896 pro-segregation ruling also formally noted: "The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. And so it is in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth and in power. So, I doubt not, it will continue to be for all time if it remains true to its great heritage and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty." So it wasn't one isolated religious figure or religious group who was wrong back during those times. It was pretty much most of the United States of America.

Anonymous said...

When leaders of society were changing society's laws and attitudes toward racism, what was HWA doing?
He vacillated between raping his daughter, and screaming that it was evil for black men to have sexual relations with white women.


Black Ops Mikey said...

If you are a Bible believer and don't believe in BI, then what do you do with Gen.49?

Here. This might help.

This summer, lay on your back on the grass on a nice warm sunny day and watch the clouds go by. One of the clouds you see looks like a map of Israel. As you watch, an amazing thing happens! The cloud reforms as a map of the British Isles as you watch! A few minutes later, it forms again, this time it is a map of the 48 continental United States! That's so amazing! This is a sign from God! This is God showing you that British Israelism is true.

Your horny friend is lying next to you. He sees genitals.

The point is that people get caught up in analogies, similes, homilies and these are not proofs. Just because A = B and C = D, doesn't mean that L = Q and that is precisely the method used by Armstrongists. You don't necessarily need to be a qualified trained logician to figure this out. All you have to do is watch CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC and read the New York Times and Los Angeles Times reports about the President Donald Trump administration to figure this out.

Armstrongism -- turning lies, half-truths and distorted perceptions into factless truth for 80 years.

CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, the New York Times and Los Angeles Times, churning out Fake News 24 by 7.

RSK said...

I totally forgot the interracial nonsense. And I caused a mild scandal by dancing with a white girl at a WCG event.

Byker Bob said...

Yep, I've caused some pretty cool scandals myself over the years, refusing to date from just one particular pigmentation. Interracial dating is fun!!!


RSK said...

WCG parents were overinfected with the fear of teenage sex. That girl definitely looked better with clothes on, ha. But our local WCG was a limited market.

Questeruk said...

As Anonymous February 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM pointed out, racism was the norm throughout most of the USA 60 to 70 years ago.

In 1947 interracial marriage between whites and blacks was illegal in 30 of the states in the USA, with some states including Asians and Native Americans in the ban.

This slowly changed, but even in 1963, the time when GTA expressed surprise at the college policy, 17 states still upheld their interracial marriage bans.

It was only in 1967 that the final 14 states were forced to repeal their laws banning interracial marriage.

That was the society of the time, and, unfortunately, the Church reflected that society, for the simple reason that members of the church were drawn from the society of that era.

Looking back from the present, to over 50 years ago, you need to take in the perspective of the era at that time.

Hoss said...

If you ask a typical COG or non-COG church member, What was the biggest issue facing the early first century church? the stock answer would probably be Law vs Grace. But the issue was racial: What do we do about Gentiles?

The issue was resolved: Jew, Gentile, it doesn't matter...

But I imagine a response to that would be, That's spiritual, this is a physical matter, the same as the physical blessings (of BI) not the spiritual.

In Hebrew thought, physical, spiritual, it's the same, it doesn't matter...

Anonymous said...

"As Anonymous February 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM pointed out, racism was the norm throughout most of the USA 60 to 70 years ago..."

Well, it certainly is good that even the apologists here admit that the "holy spirit" had no effect whatsoever, and that "god's" people who "payed, prayed, and obeyed" were indistinguishable in metrics like this one from "worldly" people, which means that jumping through all those churchy hoops was a futile exercise.

I'm glad we've got that all settled.

Questeruk said...

Everyone has baggage from their past life Anonymous 6.55pm - even you.

It's what you do with it as you progress through life that actually counts. You know, things like not deliberately distorting what someone else has said.

Anonymous said...

I am SO sick of the passive aggressive racism in LCG! Did any of you ever stomach Meredith's "Beware Satan's Alternate Universe" drivel? The man said that Christ discriminated and that it was ok to discriminate. He also added that interracial marriage was a tool of Satan. How about hearing that God doesn't want a bunch of yellowish-brownish pencils? It was played in at least one church area, who knows how many others were affected.

Where is the outrage? Where is the moral compass and backbone of these members who allow this to happen? Perhaps they're just as racist as Meredith. They're living a lie, which makes them liars.

Anyone who follows Meredith is not a Christian because if they were their alarm would be ringing loud and clear. They would have left a long time ago, but LCG is a cult, a twisted caste system, and NOT of God!

Anonymous said...

Your race is your extended family. If you don't defend the existence and culture and true history of your race then you are turning your back on your family and are not fit to live. But today's media will hate your guts if your defend your race. But only if your are white. There is a reason they do that. There is an agenda. Do you know what it is? The ones they hate and malign the most did the most to save the white race.

Anonymous said...

1) I never knew an organization where Whites and Blacks got along better than in the WCG. So what if they were RACIAL. It must work.

2) Racism and RACIAL are not the same thing. Not even close. And Supremecism is ENTIRELY different again. The media pretend they are all the same because they are LIARS.

3) You cannot avoid supremicism.

Capitalism is fiscal SUPREMICISM.
Technology gives us intellectual SUPREMICISM.
On the web, and in life, the most persistent and bullheaded and abusive commenters win by persistence regardless of how ignorant they often are. That's the SUPERMEICISM OF STUBBORNNESS AND (often) BULLYING.
Education gives us a meritocracy which is a nice word for intellecutal SUPREMECISM.
So what the heck is so bad about racial supremcism compared to the others? NOTHING. IF YOU ARE POOR YOU KNOW THIS because you live under the hate system. THE MIDDLE CLASS IS TOO STUPID TO EVER GET IT.

Anonymous said...

11:46 You are dumber than hell of you believe that most blacks in the church were treated with fairness and equity. The broad majority will tell you that they were NOT! Lie about it all you want. The church was racist to the core; starting directly with Herbert and Loma Armstrong.

nck said...

Luckily people are contributing new stories in this perpetual topic of interest.
And far more balanced than usual I might add.

To: 7:28 and the pencil story: What a terrible thing to have to sit through remarks like that (assuming they occurred)
To: 1:00 feb 23. The time and culture of the day has been discussed. And I would certainly not dismiss your personal experiences. But since you are putting it in a wider perspective by using the word "core" I a inclined to ask if you had any experience in one of the Kenyan, Tanzanian, North London, Phillipine or Indian branches of WCG of old?


Byker Bob said...

Relevance, relevance, relevance, nck! A black family from the south side of Chicago who suffered horrible discrimination during the classic era R/WCG is not going to be contemplating church conditions in Kenya, Tanzania, North London, the Phillipines, or India. People are familiar with, and affected by the daily conditions where they live. The USA has always been where the greatest concentration of Armstrong Church of God members live.

Richard Pryor's autobiography tells some stories about his trips to Africa, to countries where black rule was in place. Basically, it's the story of a parallel existence, in which totally different conditions exist. In Richard Pryor's travel experience, the highest form of government was the constitution of what ever nation he was visiting. Because British Israelism was taught as being "of God", ACOG church members around the globe based their interpretation of prophecy on that theory, along with the supposed eternal racial hierarchies which they derived from their Old Testament theology. This additiknal layer was superimposed by the church over all physical government on planet earth, regardless as to what group is majority, and what group is minority. How is that different from colonialism, or white paternalism, both of which are inherently racist?


nck said...

Yes BB.

That is right. Most of what you say is right. However it seldom paraphrases what I mean.

If someone claims that the "racism" issue was a universal thing in wcg I am asking the Kenyan or Tanzanian brethren to step forward and comment about their experiences.

I do trust that most of the experiences of "south siders" as related on the dissident blogs have all been real.
Perhaps unfortunately non of them (because of the so called triple tithe) was able to visit a Kenyan feast site and tell us about that experience.

I do hear a lot about liberal Americans buying a house in London or Switzerland and relating in the local gossip magazine what a liberating experience that is from some of the more opressive parts of American culture. Yes I get my information and data from the local trash magazine at the hair dressers. (not straigtening my hair)


nck said...

"colonialism, or white paternalism, both of which are inherently racist"

This of course true to a large degree as a system.

But in my personal experience there were so many other factors too.

-Conquerer and conquered dynamics. (I'd rather be in colonial sri lanka then under Genghis Kahn reign)
-2nd son trying to make a buck in unchartered territory.
-have and have not's
-seekers of personal glory (and gain)
-idealists education
-arms race. (of course we sell only sell f16 to the arab nations that can be shot down in a minute. Not the ones with the latest technology.)
etc etc etc

To point a "racism" as the sole engine of this phenomenon is too weak an argument. There is economics, power etc.
Just like the entire slave trade from the African West Coast initially existed as an extension of the already existing Arab - African slave trade. What entrepreneur with 16th century morality would not just improve on an existing supply chain.

Even in the 17th century people were preaching against slavery, but those preachers were few.

BUt hey I do agree that probably a lot of members from far away countries were already educated in western thought patterns. Having been part of the collapsing European empires being replaced with the American empire. Or from my travels through Africa the nucleus of wcg churches may have been formed from former SDA's and even 7th day COG's.


Redfox712 said...

Garner Ted Armstrong said that British Israelism probably cannot be proved? Wish I had known that when I first got stated to believe in what LCG taught back in 2000.

Let us all remember that statement the next time anyone insists that the British and American peoples are "Israelites."

Britsh Israelism is not true and has been proven to be wrong.

Black Ops Mikey said...

How is it that no one has pointed out that the blacks in Africa were often the ones who sold their 'brethren' into slavery.

The rhetorical question is, who was worse, the blacks in Africa who sold their own to the white slavers or the white slavers themselves?

NO2HWA said...

A lot of the slavery trade from Africa was by Muslims selling Africans to the European and American slave traders

Anonymous said...

Or living a double life like previous WCG hypocritical leadership did.....

Byker Bob said...

It seems like there is plenty of blame to spread around for the slave trade, many guilty parties. But, most of the blame falls specifically on the shoulders of those who purchased and exploited the slaves, and deliberately kept them from advancing for hundreds of years. Owning people is immoral, and corrupts the so-called owners by giving them absolute power over the owned.

Colonialism was very much akin to slavery, but it was political, economic, and psychological. In a sense, until the revolution, the American colonists were owned. Taxation without representation. Exploitation. That was cruelly enforced. Slavery was by degree, based on the class or caste system. What eventually made America great was the emergence of a huge middle class, with inherent equality. What has really freed the slaves is inclusion of their descendants into that middle class.


RSK said...

Yes, and its an attractive proposition. No longer do you have to spend all that expense feeding and housing prisoners of war, not to mention putting up with your annoying neighbors, you can just make them disappear and get some useful funds/goods/assets in the process.

However, it is not a justification for American racism in the post-slavery era. You can flush that shit out with your white hoods.

Black Ops Mikey said...

Britsh Israelism is not true and has been proven to be wrong

Redfox, it's so much worse than that.

British Israelism worst science fiction ever.

nck said...

"However, it is not a justification for American racism in the post-slavery era."

Food for thought. I must read more about this.

I think in essence most people cannot bear doing these type of things to other people.
99% of Europeans at the time would not have a clue what really took place on the shores of West Africa. Just like most Germans were not aware of the real nature of the atrocities. Until Ike and Hitchcock rubbed their noses in it.

For the people "doing the job" usually all kinds of psychological tricks were/are used to de-humanize "the cargo/ stock" or give the dead bodies abstract names like "Figuren" (figurs).

I think most people today have no clue where and how the metals in their Cell Phone or remote control, or perhaps that funny 2 dollar t-shirt are produced.

We play(ed) all kind of pscychological tricks to survive, or get a good smoke from quality tobacco. One of the few things I remember from religion is that in the end, we are all represented by that soldier putting the spear in Christ's side.


Anonymous said...

the Church is not racist, but the people God has chosen to run the Church are racist, and this is nothing new...

in the book of Acts it is clear that a number of the Apostles and leading figures in the original Church were deeply prejudiced (Galatians 2:11-14), and there are signs that this pov led to instability, just as it has done to this day...

such behavior has consistently stunted the growth of the Church, and all the fasting in the world wont make a difference; only repentance will make a difference...