Tuesday, July 18, 2017

I Pray That those Who Have Left The Church Will Repent And Come Back To The Truth



A comment was made on another COG related group about COG members who have left the fold.  The naivety of this person is as shallow as the statement.  Did you know that if it were not for Herbert Armstrong, none of you nor the entire world would EVER know the truth or have been exposed to it? Even worse, you would have never been part of the church!  A church that is the most unified and glorious church ever in human history.  God apparently was incapable of keeping his church alive for 1,900 years till Herbert Armstrong arrived on the scene.  Anyone with half a wit knows that is utter nonsense.  Herbert Armstrong's legacy has not continued on with Dave pack, Gerald Weston, Gerald Flurry, Ron Weinland, Vic Kubik and most assuredly not by Bob Thiel and James Malm.

It is had to believe that in 2017 that some people still believe that salvation comes from knowing Herbert Armstrong and his words.

"I tell them, without God working through Mr. Armstrong, they would not even know the Truth or have been given an opportunity to be a part of the Church of God at this time. I pray they can see through the deception and come back to the foundation. May we all hold fast to these precious truths we have been given!"

114 comments:

Byker Bob said...

Well, without HWA, nobody would have known about Armstrongism, that is for certain! Whether God would work through such a man, or teach His truth through HWA is a completely different question and matter. We get to have certain insights that could shed light on that, derived from the accuracy of his prophecies (which he chose to call his insights into the news from a Biblical perspective, but then used extrabiblical theories as his keys such as British Israelism, Church Eras, and a 7,000 year plan to turn his followers into self-righteous separatists, incapable of caring for those outside his little group).

Bad fruit, spirit-killing totalitarian governance, and ruined lives from prophecy gone wrong have been the man's chief legacies. But a lot of peoples' minds got baked by him, and there still are some of the baked ones who have filtered out the obvious in order to continue the delusion that here was a man through whom God revealed "truth" for and about the endtimes, to usher in the tribulation and then the millennium.

As someone once commented on another forum, years ago, I would much rather have been lied to about Santa Claus! Santa is ruputed to have practiced the way of "give". HWA practiced the way of "get".

BB

Beans On Toast said...

Hebert Armstrong was a money grubbing liar and his followers are idiots. He was not the "end-time elijah" and he stole a lot of his teachings from the Mormons and Jehovah witnesses.

Helen Wheels said...

Which "truth" is this? Which "foundation"? British Israelism? 1972 In Prophecy? Church eras? HWA's bastardized versions of Jewish rituals? Stories about a guy who they're so embarrassed by they don't even like to say his name?

Anonymous said...

Herbie was about as much as Christian as Bruce Jenner is female. It's all fake.

Connie Schmidt said...

I do not believe that the Mormons or Jehovah Witnesses had influence on HWA. Definitely the doctrines of the Church of God 7th Day did, as were the writings of a rogue SDA minister G.G. Rupert.

Anonymous said...

Reading some of the Mormon sites, it becomes obvious that HWA borrowed his "family of God" doctrine from the LDS Church. It is said that this was one of the cornerstones of Joseph Smith's ministry, and that 181 years ago Joseph Smith came in the spirit of Elijah and turned the hearts of the sons to the fathers and vice versa.

Does COG-7 teach this? Did GG Rupert?
Joseph Smith predated them, unless you believe the artificially contrived and largely debunked materials in "The True History of the True Church"

Anonymous said...

This reminds me of my attendance days when members would pronounce the word church in reverential tones. Christ by contrast pointed out that His brothers and sisters are those who did Gods will. There was no mention of church attendance.
Salvation is through Christ rather than Herbs gulag.

Anonymous said...

Herbs "give way" meant robbing the responsible in order to give to the irresponsible. No wonder the losers worship the man.

nck said...

Yes Connie,

I even doubt that HWA knew that JW shared some of the same background, which is the reason why some see similarities in wcg doctrine and claim influence.

I don't know if HWA ever associated with mormons. Some doctrines like the God family look alike. And defenitely the Ambassador (lion and lamb) seal is the exact same as one of the Mormon split offs.

Shared is the culture of "tribal movement". If seems that some shared characteristics of Mormonism and WCG have a shared Masonic background. WCG having early ministers introducing that speculation into doctrine. And Mormonism being heavily influenced with Masonism.

nck

NO2HWA said...

HWA knew exactly what the JW's, Mormons, and SDA believed. In his basement was a safe that was filled with overflow books from the library upstairs. There were books from each of these groups that had been underlined in places and had notes in the margins. The claim cannot be made that he did not know what they believed.

Anonymous said...

A JW dissident site stated out that WCG was the only other group that taught the 1975 end time date. That alone points to a strong link. Reading their sites, the JW culture is very similar to the WCG and its splinters. The JWs complain of being mentally ground down and treated like babies. Since the JW started in the 1870s, Herb copied from them rather than the other way around.

Anonymous said...

The following comments are from YouTube "Watchtower examination 80" Notice the similarity to WCG.

"When I tell Jehovah's Witnesses about my power to reject question or even reject what my church (SDA) says to me, while still being a member, they (JW) find it a hard concept to grasp. They don't see freedom to act on one's conscience. They see religious confusion.

Watchtower Examination, Because they (JW) are so used to being controlled and told that they need someone to guide them. They continue to be fed milk and starve. Never understanding that eventually they grow up and have to start thinking and acting for themselves. This is something that isn't nurtured within the organization because the organization seeks to control every aspect of their lives. Sadly, they're the forever babies. Until they can wake up, embrace adulthood and research to achieve full discernment they will always wear the veil. Let those with ears hear and those with eyes see, fits it nicely."

RSK said...

I remember HWA candidly commenting that he'd read JW literature at one point. Not sure about the LDS, but no reason to believe he hadn't skimmed over theirs either.

Aron Ra Is An Idiot said...

Some of the false teachings of Herb Armstrong were "going to a place of safety", "church eras", keeping the "Hebrew feast days", "holy day offering " and "three tithes". No wonder WCG had one of the highest suicide rates among it's members more than any other church denomination in North America.

Minimalist said...

Why would "God's Endtime Elijah" need to plagiarize - clone - whole booklets?
This was exposed in the 1970s; it was all downhill for him from there!

nck said...

NO2HWA,

Thanks for the additional information.

Both Connie and I did NOT say that HWA did not KNOW what JW's and SDA believed.

Speaking for myself. I said. "I even doubt that HWA knew that JW shared some of the same background (with cog), which is the reason why some see similarities in wcg doctrine and claim influence. "

I believe the percentages of defectors from the Mormons to WCG was extremely limited. Whereas from SDA there would be serious percentages. Especially in the international areas. WCG offices were always extremely close to SDA offices. Since SDA was the earlier "evangelizing" group with sufficient numbers of experience to have produced defectors being absorbed in cog related groups.

nck

nck said...

Moreover I think for (scolastic reasons) it is important to know the route of the key wcg doctrines and the cultures it was influenced by.

It is funny to read about "what a narcissitic little dictator" hwa was perceived to be.
It gets intelligent when it is shown that he was perhaps just emanating a "1930's" managerial style which all of his contemporary succesful peers executed.

A lot of discussions here on personal experiences are seriously funny but look like a person describing their own weaknesses without knowing their family history or even their grandfather.

I recommend "who do you think you are" tv program. Interesting to see people with no knowledge of their ancestors see things in perspective when "meeting" them in the right context. (Although I realize that for entertainment purposes they always manage to find some "puppet player in Mordavia" as ancestor to a famous Hollywood actor.)

nck

Anonymous said...

You must atleast question what HWA taught as, "new truths", what he brought out during the time he was sexually abusing his daughter. Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't it during this time that he brought out the holy day doctrines and British Isrealism? Do you really think that God would introduce, "new truths" to his true believers through a man who was sexually abusing his own daughter?

Waldo said...

Anyone seen or heard from Wes White?

Lake of Fire Church of God said...

NO2HWA said, "HWA knew exactly what the JW's, Mormons, and SDA believed. In his basement was a safe that was filled with overflow books from the library upstairs".

MY COMMENT - Interesting that probably 99 out of 100 people keep valuables such as cash, jewelry, collectibles, gold and silver in a safe. Herbert Armstrong, in contrast, kept the secret keys to his family business in his safe.

Let's not forget Herbert Armstrong, after pitching an aluminum siding bid to a SDA minister during the bottom of the Great Depression and was impressed that the minister had money, arrived home to Loma and announced that he had found the new family business.

Richard

nck said...

6:20

"Correct me if I am wrong"

For legal reasons you stand corrected for not using the word "allegedly".

I'm sorry, but that is the plain truth.
I wished it was different either way.


Nck

Anonymous said...

Nck
HWA 'emanating a '1930s' management style' is a choice that he made. He was a free moral agent with the ability to chose the Hitler school of management, or the biblical, Christ like 'let the greatest be like the least.' In expecting people to repent, God rejects 'but I don't have a choice' determinism.

nck said...

There is nothing "new" in any biblical interpretation.

Over 2000 years all has been said and can only be attractively repackaged in order to be in tune with contemporary challenges.

HWA masterfully did this for a Cold War audience in a still defragmented world.

The technology driven Global Enpire wiping out most trouble is nigh.

Nck

nck said...

It seems like "the life of Brian" that many things were attributed to HWA even if he specifically denied it 5 inches from your face.

EXACTLY like "the life of Brian".

Nck

Lake of Fire Church of God said...

nck said, "I believe the percentages of defectors from the Mormons to WCG was extremely limited. Whereas from SDA there would be serious percentages."

MY COMMENT - I attended the WCG Washington, D.C./Baltimore, Md. congregations from 1968 to 1976. A suburb of Washington, D.C. is Silver Spring, Md. which is where the World Headquarters of the Seventh Day Adventist Church is located. Washington Adventist University (formerly known as Columbia Union College) is located in the Washington suburb of Tacoma Park, Md. There is a heavy concentration of SDAs in this area as it is to the Seventh Day Adventist Church what Pasadena, Ca. and Big Sandy, Texas were to the Worldwide Church of God. The local Washington WCG congregation had some former SDAs in attendance. The Thomason family immediately comes to my mind but there were others. We regularly (maybe once every 2 years) had sermons or sermonettes from WCG ministers on the differences and the errors of the SDA Church I surmise because of the large SDA concentration in our Church area.

Let's not forget that the Worldwide Church of God is an "offshoot of an offshoot" of the Seventh Day Adventist Church.

Richard



Anonymous said...

Why would "God's Endtime Elijah" need to plagiarize - clone - whole booklets?

Because this very cunning man(not a prophet for sure!) knows that many many people never read the Bible to prove their beliefs, they based their whole religion on a bunch of church literature...written by a M-A-N.

Once you've chosen following a m-a-n, all the top honchos have to do is clone/rewrite/copy that m-a-n's booklets.....

Easy audience, all ready for the False Shepherd/Hireling[you fill in the blank]

Questeruk said...

Anonymous 2:04 said...
"A JW dissident site stated out that WCG was the only other group that taught the 1975 end time date. That alone points to a strong link."

Maybe - however, if this was one group influencing the other, then it was the JW's who were doing the plagiarism, and copying HWA.

HWA's 1975 in prophecy was copyrighted in 1956. The JW slant on this only came in ten years later, in 1966 (see:- https://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/1975.php )

Both organisations claim that the year 1975 was 'only implied'.

Anonymous said...

I don't care what faults you have with the Armstrongs. The issue about the "Trinity" is simple. There's plenty of historical Pagan teachings to show it's origins. The Bible plainly teaches the there is a Father and Son and that we can become children of God. That God is a Family not a Trinity is a no brainer, except for the mass deception from the Great Deceiver and Father of Lies. Group Think rules the world.

Anonymous said...

So, you believe that the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force, and not an interactive, sentient being? Can electricity be grieved?

What if all history of paganism had been eradicated and all you had from which to learn was the Bible? The Holy Spirit did not even indwell humans intil the New Testament.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 7/19 @ 12:35 PM. In all actuality, Herbert W. Armstrong's "God Family" concept has its roots in Paganism, not the doctrine of the Trinity.

The doctrine of the Trinity is in harmony with Holy Scripture. The Holy Bible plainly reveals that (1) There is only one God. (2) The Father is God. (3) The Son-Jesus Christ is God. (4) The Holy Spirit is God. (5) The Father is not the Son. (6) The Son is the not the Holy Spirit. (7) The Holy Spirit is not the Father. The Holy Bible is also clear that all people are God’s creation (Colossians 1:16), and that God loves the entire world (John 3:16), but only those who are born again (which is a present reality, not a future one like HWA taught) are children of God (John 1:12; 11:52; Romans 8:16; 1 John 3:1-10).

The doctrine of the Trinity is a strict monotheism, whereas Armstrongism teaches that God is two beings (bi-theism), which is the same as some pagan groups believe and teach - the worship of many gods. Armstrong taught that God is a family. Well the Greeks and Romans worshiped a family of gods too - again, Paganism.

God is not a Family and will not consist of a family of god beings (i.e. humans can't and won't ever "become God as God is God", see Isaiah 43:10). Sadly, it is you Armstrongites that have been deceived by the Great Deceiver and Father of Lies, and that is the "no-brainer". Repent and believe in the Gospel.

I Know John Cafourek Is NOT A Christian said...

The teachings of HWA caused more pain & sorrow to people (primarily to the ones who suffered financial difficulties) before Joe Tkach finally changed those bombastic teachings and now members of GCI are more happy for it. I'm no longer a unhappy member of WCG, but a very happy member of Grace Communion International.

Anonymous said...

12.12 PM
Rather only the leaders in both organizational claim that 1975 was 'only implied.' The members in both organisations, especially those who sold their homes and gave the proceeds to their church, believe otherwise. I read the 1960s WCG literature, and I know from personal experience that it was much more than implied. HWA used all his marketing skills to mislead members into believing in 1975, while avoiding legal liability. Ah, the efficacy of guile. Their are many YouTube videos by former JWs on 1975. It was way beyond implied.

Byker Bob said...

What I've always found to be humerous is that there are examples in paganism and folklore of mother-son virgin birth, meaning that using Armstrong/Hislop reasoning you could invalidate Jesus in the same fashion as they do with the personhood of the Holy Spirit. Armstrongism was always a pick and choose system of belief. Regardless of logic or other input, whatever the old man picked and mandated was what they went with, and there was then never any serious or hardball troubleshooting or discussion. They'd just roll out "God's Apostle's" proof texts.

Maybe if they had had a better understanding of God the Holy Spirit, we wouldn't have had 1975.

BB

nck said...

Hey Richard,

What was that all about?

In about the year 2000 on a trip from DC to New York I drove by Silver Spring to give my wife to be an impression of what "type" of church I once adhered to. So I agree with the similarities.

My point was that wcg always operated in "sabbath friendly" (media savvy) areas. That is Bricket Wood was just opposite the road from SDA Headquarters Britain at the time. Many other European nations same thing. Australia many SDA's. Sri Lanka not many Buddhist converts but of course from the christian areas.

You should visit the agricultural areas of Kenya. SDA all over.

I had this discussion before but NEVER was COG a split off of SDA.

A case can be made though that both SDA and WCG share the same roots.

nck

nck said...

July 19, 2017 at 9:40 AM

I believe you are right in an absolute sense.

I do admit that for me it would be very hard to believe that IF I had been a succesfull farmer in the South in 1835 that I would not have employed slaves. Perhaps a case can be made that I would have been a "good" boss man. Or perhaps seen the error of my ways and divested my money into Northern industry or iron mines perhaps. But to be different from my context in the way God would have expected of me as you imply. I am not sure.

nck

Anonymous said...

12:12 PM
The JWs had several end time dates prior to 1975. Perhaps Herb was inspired by this, realizing the short term benefits. This despite it being condemned in the bible by:

Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

The JW belief that Christ was crucified on a tree is also the same as Herbs. It was most likely a cross, which was the norm for the last 100 years prior to Christ. There are too many similarities.

nck said...

12:35

I do think there is beauty in the God is a family doctrine. And you seem to understand it quite well since it is a no brainer to you.

During my entite 23 year tenure in our fellowship I never fully understood why there was no wife in that family relationship. Except that the son was supposed to marry the wife.

Of course I do now understand it all from an entirely scientific perspective. But was somewhat tickled by the no brainer part of your comment.

Nck

RSK said...

I suppose, BB, that you could hold up early forms of Egyptian religion and say they believed in a "God Family" into which one could be born too!

Anonymous said...

Oh, there was a wife in the family, nck. It was Ashteroth, the mythical mother of Baal and Yahweh, among others. Your religion didn't start out monotheistic.

Allen C. Dexter

nck said...

Yes Allen,

I said: "Of course I do now understand it all from an entirely scientific perspective."The

Meaning 1: The temple jews compiling a new religion for a new people tried to root out as many references as possible to the woman in the closet. They even managed to twist the original religion of the Edomites//Tribes of Israel into being pagan. Much alike the Catholic Church fierce reaction to people like Cardinal Lefebre. They/he just continued mass in the "old ways". Being labeled heretics in the process. Which is also true, but that is another story altogether.

Meaning 2: Armstrongism being turned into a "Personality Cult" projected their system of governance. HWA 1 GTA 2 on the governance of the Universe which would of course pertain a Father and Son to rule all. (and a mother being deceased or silenced (in 1950's marriage style).

For some WCG ended with the notorious date of 1975. I like to blame it on the removal of a pivotal doctrine of BI by Russians who could by nature not understand the Scottish Masonic rites of the Church like a Scot.

A case can however be made that the real demise of the Church started with the seccession of GTA. Since it removed a pivotal understanding in the Church of a Father and Son ruling all.

But I am ok with it if some claim it was destined to fail since it was founded on sand.
That position however does not explain it's huge success in the first place. Therefore I like to harp on explanations of its successes. Thereby attracting "frenemies" labelling it "my religion."

nck



nck said...

"I suppose, BB, that you could hold up early forms of Egyptian religion and say they believed in a "God Family" into which one could be born too!"


That is not necessary RSK.

The New Testament writers adopted the ROMAN model of a family.

"thereby you call me abba father in the spirit of ADOPTION"

Most Roman Emperors were adopted sons . Julius Ceasar was adopted into the Julii. Adopted sons had equal or even higher status to some family members who were "blood related."

In Law school it struck me like a lightning when I studied the basics of the Roman legal System and contrasting it to the Anglo Saxon system.

nck




Anonymous said...

You Seem To Not Realize That ALL Mythology Has Elements Of Truth. Even Before White Men Came To The "New World" My People Worshipped The Great Spirit Which Of Course The Father Of All Creation. God Is Yahweh, Jehovah, Great Spirit, Etc. Etc. You can research ALL Myths, Legends & Folklore And It All Has Traces Of Truth. But, That Being Said, Why Do You Even Care If A Person Believes In A A Supernatural Maker? What A Person Does Or Thinks In Their Personal Life IS In Fact Non Of Your Business!!! Don't Bother Commenting Back To Me Because Your Comment At 8:48 PM Shows You Have An Attitude Problem And I Hold No Respect For You!!!

Hoss said...

Anon 200 wrote It was most likely a cross

The koine Greek word stauros was originally defined as "upright stake" and later defined as "cross" (see, for example, Wikipedia).
However, I remember in Protestant Sunday School learning that the "cross" was actually an upright stake with a crossbar attached at the top. So perhaps Catholics should really make the sign of the T as in Brave New World.

Anonymous said...

As far as I'm concern, your 'but in the Plantation South in 1835..' can be used to intellectualise away all of Gods laws. Hence 'but in the 21 century, just about everyone fornicated, used recreational drugs' etc etc.
Building a moral code based on extreme circumstances, eg survivors in a life boat, is also intellectually dishonest. Yes, starving people in lifeboats have killed and eaten each other to survive, but it's not everyday life.

Anonymous said...

1:23 PM - "The doctrine of the Trinity is in harmony with Holy Scripture." The Trinity is not only non-biblical, it's illogical.

Speaking of the Trinity, Augustine said “Try to understand it and you’ll lose your mind”, because it's nonsense.

Genesis 1 uses Elohim and states let us make man in our image. That's 2 beings.
John 1 says the Word was with God and the Word was (also) God.
Christ said the Father is greater than I. How can that be in a Trinity?
Jesus said "only the Father knows when Jesus would return". Christ said "I go to the Father". Why go anywhere if you are also the Father. That's nuts.

Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, makes the Holy Spirit Christ's father.
Yes, it's a no brainier that HWA's God Family is correct.

Lake of Fire Church of God said...

Nck said, "I had this discussion before but NEVER was COG a split off of SDA".

MY COMMENT - I think we are splitting hairs.

From Wikipedia: The Church of God (Seventh Day) represents a line of Sabbatarian Adventists that rejected the visions and teachings of Ellen G. White before the formation of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in 1863.

In Michigan, two groups morphed from one group - those that accepted the visions of Ellen G. White and went on to form the Seventh Day Adventist Church and those that rejected the visions of Ellen G. White to form the Church of God. It is true that there were at that time other independent Churches of God not part of the Michigan groups that went on to form the General Conference of the Church of God, Seventh Day which may be why you state that COG was never a split off of SDA.

An early predecessor name of Worldwide Church of God Parent Church of God, Seventh Day was Church of God (Adventist).

You probably know the name of Richard Nickels. He has chronicled much of the early evolution of the Seventh Day Churches of God including the division between those that became the Seventh Day Adventists. He even noted his experience in the early 1980s of finding a group of SDAs that kept the Feast of Tabernacles. Based on his writings, I would say referring to the Worldwide Church of God as "an offshoot of an offshoot" of the Seventh Day Adventist Church a very fair statement.

Richard

nck said...

Yes Richard,

It is splitting hairs that, is true.
Although wars have been waged over minor differences like an Egyptian monk told me in a monastery in the Egyptian Delta region, while discussing the split, resulting from the Council of Chalcedon.

Far more interesting are the stories of COG people moving into Indian territory in the Dakotas or the Oklahoma Territories. Visits by the Prince of Ethiopia. (Lion of Judah) Grandma being derided for smoking a pipe. And women for visiting a skating rink.

I like to split hairs though. From a "legal/organizational" perspective you honestly quoted that COG did NOT split from SDA but from Sabbatarian Adventists. So it can also be argued that SDA split through its acceptance of the leadership of the Whites.

More importantly however is the "mental" separation from the acceptation of the visions of EG White. I know you realize that especially early in the formation of any social order these are important majors in the formation of the "organizational culture."
It was a big thing to separate on the basis of minors like the name of the church, other key issues, but especially the rejection of the visions of EG White. That is not hair splitting.

Both organizations have developed separately. And as I understand it SDA went through several reformations over the past 150 years until it joined the World Council of Churches some few years ago, moving from a Cult to a mainstream Church denomination.

All of this is only remotely interesting to fringe people like myself.
But could have served as a tool when the Tkaches decided to reform WCG. It shows the unprofessionalism in not understanding the key drivers of the organization before attempting to transform it into something more mainstream. I do agree that it had to transform since it was destined to go the way of Kodak.

nck

nck said...

July 20, 2017 at 6:27 AM

I consider your remarks "iron sharpening iron."

I am pretty sure those nice ladies in the NT accommodating Paul and other leaders in the church had quite a bunch of household slaves running around serving the "oinos".

It's been a while when I studied the differences between a moral code and a code to regulate society and the formation proces of the two. So excuse me if you please.

Same difficulty in a "Church Corporate". People expect the Cardinals to behave like Jesus. While in fact they are running a billion dollar company. Hard to discern the "corporate" man doing "the work". And the spiritual life of the same person.

The same goes for the question "Can an American President be gay?" Perhaps not morally acceptable by scriptural precepts. But he//she might just be the best thing happening in the country if that person makes the right decisions, not.

nck

Byker Bob said...

And of course the big question of the Armstrong era remains, "Does anyone remember HWA or any Armstrongite minister EVER quoting Ezekiel 21:26-27 in ANY sermon, those verses ever appearing in any church literature, or even a member requesting an explanation at Bible Study?"

This is just a bombshell omission! If I had never read the Bible cover-to-cover a few years ago, I would never have known that this scripture even existed. It's a flagrant example of how Armstrongism left inconvenient things out of their proof-texting.

BB

RSK said...

Well aware of that, nck. Just doesnt scream "PAGAAAAAN" quite as much to cite the Romans. ;)

Byker Bob said...

Pagan is a descriptive, filtering label, overly used in Armstrongism to create guilt by association, and for the purpose of pseudo-confirmation that Armstrongism was God's only true church. Via Solomon, we get that there is nothing new under the sun. Therefore, it is impossible to eliminate everything the pagans ever did from our lives, and to still conduct a life. I mean, you can't even escape this conundrum by dying, because all of the pagans did that as well. Pagans drank water, but we don't forego that. Yet, if your ACOG minister tells you that the pagans shaved their heads, you are expected, soley based on his word and "authority" to pick another non-trendy hair style of which he approves. If Armstrongism ruled the world, the old, wire-based telephone companies would never have gotten off the ground, because their phone poles were basically just taller crosses. They'd also have us eliminating the letters T and X from the alphabet, because of Tammuz, who nobody living today ever heard of except for Armstrongites.

Unthinking individuals today say that Jesus was not crucified on a cross, because crosses are pagan. They ignore part of the history of crucifixion (etymologists: check out the root words!). The stakes were often premounted in the ground, the condemned was pre-nailed to the cross piece, and final assembly happened at the execution site. Also, it's not as if Jesus had a choice in His method of execution! According to the gist of the prophecies, His death was to be that of a disgraceful criminal. If an Armstongite today were to suffer the most disgraceful death possible, it would most likely be shrouded in the elements of paganism. What if some of these false teachers get to live out their Armstrongite fantasies, and are persecuted and executed, and someone who has been told by Bob Thiel that crosses are pagan
executes them by crucifixion?

BB

Questeruk said...

Byker Bob said...
"And of course the big question of the Armstrong era remains, "Does anyone remember HWA or any Armstrongite minister EVER quoting Ezekiel 21:26-27 in ANY sermon, those verses ever appearing in any church literature, or even a member requesting an explanation at Bible Study?"

Certainly I do Bob. But surely it was mentioned when you were still there too?

It was considered a key scripture, re Jeremiah and the daughters of Zedekiah travelling to Ireland, followed by the 5th century move to Scotland, and the 17th century move to England.

Definitely appeared in sermons and church literature, on several occasions.

RSK said...

Sure, it was used as a prooftext in USBIP.

Byker Bob said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Byker Bob said...

Oh. It was associated with that conspiracy theory? Tea Tephi and the Lia Fail? That is not supported by legitimate history. It is in the same category as Nimrod having a consort named Semiramus, or Jesus' lost years having been spent traveling around the world with his "uncle" Joseph of Arimathea. Or Simon Magus starting the Catholic Church.

Also, how could you make the case that any of the people who have lived in the British Isles or their kings and queens have been any more righteous and worthy and less idolatrous or pagan than the Jews or Israelites post-David? Even the Armstrongites admit that Jesus Christ is the one to whom the crown belongs (v 27). Yet, their theory had God repeating the same fiasco that came about through the descendents of Jereboam and Rehoboam. It makes no sense at all in the context of those verses to have a whole new collection of evil throne-warmers.

BB

Anonymous said...

July 20, 2017 at 7:03 AM - Your comments just prove that you, like your teachers in Armstrongism, know absolutely nothing about the doctrine of the Trinity, nor do you know the actual meaning of the Hebrew word Elohim. HWA redefined that word to suit his bi-theistic view of the Godhead. You all keep using the same proof texts and the same lame arguments over and over again, even though they've been refuted consistently and Biblically. HWA's view of the Godhead is identical to pagan beliefs, but you're too blind to see it. HWA's God-family is pagan, false and idolatrous because you all believe that you are going to become God. You can go to Google and YouTube and look up how the heresies of Armstrongism have been refuted time and again.

anonymous63 said...

If he was "nailed to a tree", then what was it that the other carried for him on his way to being crucified?

Did those that crucified him not make something that read "King of the Jews"? Where was that thing placed? Would that possibly give the appearance of a 'cross'?

Anonymous said...

3.42 PM
If God is a trinity, what is the name of number three? The trinity doctrine is hotly debated on the internet, so it's not self evident as you claim. Pagan? They wore cloths, does that make it wrong?
I believe salesman Herb oversold the God part, implying members will have Gods creative, supernatural powers. I don't believe this, and is unnecessary. One being to define reality and create the universe, plants, and animals is all that's needed.
If resurrected beings will live and grow for all eternity, becoming in many ways like God is not far fletched.

Byker Bob said...

They've also said that Jesus was nailed to a stake. Guess what! Even if the crossbar is out of the picture, you are left with another pagan thing. What did they tell us about church steeples and obelisks? Wasn't it Rod Meredith who called them "big penises waving up into the face of God"?

BB

Hoss said...

Anon 342 wrote know absolutely nothing about the doctrine of the Trinity...

Now I'm not weighing in on the Trinity argument, nor the "binitarian" or "family" view, but commenting that years ago I listening to some seminary lectures by a Reformed Lutheran professor. In his history of the Trinity doctrine, he held that this doctrine evolved over hundreds of years. Of course he had to add that Martin Luther finally "got it right".
I also heard Catholic professors teach that Augustine set out the basic form of the Trinity doctrine which the Catholic Church would adopt.
Shouldn't doctrine have been settled during the first century?

RSK said...

Yes, BB, and it was another writer who said "at WCG, the real dickheads were INSIDE the building." :)

RSK said...

Maybe the real issue isnt the cross. Maybe apparent right angles are in fact pagan. ;)

Byker Bob said...

Here's the deal. Let me make it real simple. Three things are mentioned in the Bible which pertain to the basic concept of God. These are mentioned over, and over, and over. 1) God the Father. 2) Jesus Christ, the Son of God. 3) The Holy Spirit. There are three. You cannot argue that there are one, two, four, etc. So, pagan equivalents involving threes are completely irrelevant, and beside the point.

God and all of his aspects are so deep, and so complex, that humans restricted to five senses and seventy years (if they are lucky) cannot comprehend well enough to quantify Him, and to make that so that if someone disagrees with one of the fixed concepts, they lose salvation. Anything that a human uses to define God is anthropomorphic, and automatically places our human limitations upon Him. So it is absolutely ridiculous and pretentious to label Him as a Unity, Binity, or Trinity, and then to conduct frivolous arguments about that!

BB

Anonymous said...

3:42 PM

All you said is that the Bible's teaching that God is a family has been refuted and then don't give any evidence.

Show us your cards.

nck said...

I saw a 5 part documentary on the very origins of Islam. With real scolars.
The compilers of Islam went out of their way confirming the Prophet Jesus's special status (as a celestial creature) without affirming him being a God. Therefore they had to give Mary special status also, perhaps influenced by Syriac Christianity.

Anyway I remember HWA speaking to Hosni Mubarak, suddenly mentioning that they worshipped the same God, Allah. Not that is a revolutionary concept, combining THE ONE ALLAH, with the concept of WCG's Family God.

HWA seemed to have no problem pouring in 1 million dollars for a combined Christian, Islamic, Judaism, peace/worship center in honor of "God", in the Sinai. He must have been quite liberal on his concept of God since as BB says, we/our five senses cannot comprehend it anyways.

The jews suffered millions of casualties over the millenia defending the concept of ONE. Mubarak nearly choked when handed the first installment, and the Catholics, well they like the Hindus worship thousands of Saints as the manifestations of the Spirit of the One God.

Yes, the Hindu only acknowledge ONE "source", manifestating in what WESTERNERS call thousands of Gods.

I think What Thai Los Angeles are perhaps the only humans able to reconcile WCG's doctrine, with what God actually likes to be, through his creation of silly us.

nck

nck said...

RE: RSK July 20, 2017 at 11:12 AM


Well if you are looking for an ancient pagan predecessor of an ALL CAPS marketing wizzard avant la lettre.

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-near-eastern-world/5000-year-old-egyptian-billboard/

nck

Anonymous said...

BB
I disagree. With our God plain minds we can at least intellectually define God. It's thanks to a thingy called concepts/categories. Defined as a integration of units having the same fundamental characteristics. In fact God reveals His fundamental traits by the titles He gives Himself. There's a good article on the web about the various titles of God. I've had a look several times. It makes a good bible study.
Over the decades, I have never read a article or heard a sermon by Herbs ministers about the various titles of God. Rather the ministers endlessly exalt their church, Herb, and themselves. God is minimized and Christ is practically not there, as if disfellowshiped.

Byker Bob said...

About 15 years ago, there was this cat by the name of Sabian on a Hebraic roots forum that I used to frequent. In one of his posts, he itemized and translated all of God's names that were used in the Torah. As you say, it was quite an interesting study, and I might add, totally cool. Somewhere in one of my notebooks, I probably have a printout.

However, I still maintain that our human attempts to visualize God are all limited by our own humanness. Provided that we don't allow ourselves to be limited by people calling themselves ministers, apostles, and prophets, there is enough information there for salvation, but some day we will undoubtedly realize, despite our best efforts, how little we really knew or understood.

BB

Lake of Fire Church of God said...

Nck said, “I like to split hairs though. From a "legal/organizational" perspective you honestly quoted that COG did NOT split from SDA but from Sabbatarian Adventists. So it can also be argued that SDA split through its acceptance of the leadership of the Whites”.

MY COMMENT – Ok, hairs split. I agree with you! You are right and I am wrong.

A better analogy than my “offshoot from an offshoot” is that both organizational lines were one Sabbatarian Adventist Church in embryo until the Ellen G. White visions divided the Church a few years before both were both formally organized. Once split, the two Churches were siblings. Therefore, the Worldwide Church of God is the nephew and not the grandchild of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. This means splits in the Seventh Day Adventist Church such as the now famous Branch Davidians are the first cousins of the Worldwide Church of God, and not some distant relative.

My whole point for bringing the relationship to the Seventh Day Adventist Church up was in conformation of what NO2HWA said, "HWA knew exactly what the JW's, Mormons, and SDA believed. In his basement was a safe that was filled with overflow books from the library upstairs". Damn right he knew because his pitching the SDA minister for the aluminum siding job and his subsequent announcement to Loma that he found the new family business came about the same time Mrs. Armstrong began interacting with Mrs. Runcorn and then Herbert’s 6 month study in the Oregon Library. The two sibling Churches interact with each other as Richard Nickels conveyed about Mr. Raymond Cole’s family history in the Church of God, Seventh Day and relatives of the original Michigan Seventh Day Adventists.

In an age before the internet, every year at the Feast of Tabernacles Mr. Armstrong would recite the history of the Radio/Worldwide Church of God including its origins in the parent Sardis era dead Church of God, Seventh Day going back to 1927 if memory serves me correctly. I believe Mr. Armstrong intentionally, deliberately and conveniently failed to recount the full history going 60+ years back further from 1927 to the 1860s and the birth of the two Church siblings. After all, he was found with Seventh Day Adventist minister G.G. Rupert’s writings, and would have been contemporaries with some of the older original first and second generation members of the two sibling Churches.

Agreed, all of this is only remotely interesting to fringe people like OURSELVES.

Richard

Ilija Korac said...

Satan minded people are steadily abusing somebody and Mr. Armstrong is victim of such people. Mr. Armstrong can not grebe the money because the Church income ware not control by the church that mean no one cannot get it not even Mr. Armstrong. Who ever preach the true before Mr Armstrong? no one This people who abusing Mr, Armstrong should keep they mouth shut and min they own business.

Anonymous said...

@ 8:22 AM

What the hell is a "God plain mind"? Is that something like being the "weak of the world" and God only revealing Doofus Dave and Bitter Bob's "truths" to babes?

nck said...

Richard/aka Lake of Fire,

As much as I enjoy the "hairsplitting" I should one day investigate further on the broader concept of the cultural context of the COG.

First of all it was a time when more Americans died than in both World Wars combined.
But perhaps that is more relevant to the not so often mentioned Quaker (Goodbye Friends) thread in the garment of our former association.

In light of my remarks regarding COG moving into Oklahoma Territory and the Dakotas I was pondering the Oregon congregations. Speaking about fringes of society. I believe Oregon at the time was the END station. Being regarded as the pinnacle of the Conquest of the West. The Frontier was conquered. Nature subjugated by man. Native American turned into friendly guides in the newly created National Parks.

I was just theorizing to see HWA's mission to meet more world leaders than Henry Kissinger in that light. To expand the frontier of the Western Empire, to make allies of those that are not part of the fold (the natives), confront the evil empire (Nature/The Wild/The Savage/Russia) as a philosophy can only be conquered by another philosophy and warn the world about impending nuclear catastrophe in the proces.

Not making a hero out of anyone.

Just theorizing about the cultural connotations of our heritage.

nck



RSK said...

You're really reminding me of the Iron Sheik now.

Byker Bob said...

The world already knew about the dangers of a nuclear catastrophe. Lulu had warned the world through her top 40 hit "Morning Dew" in 1968. Fear of nuclear winter was why the USA behaved with such restraint, losing so many lives in Viet Nam, as opposed to simply nuking Hanoi and getting it over with.

HWA, through his photo ops and funding of causes amongst the rich and powerful of the world was actually working against the prophecies which he taught, and in which we thought he believed. We should have realized that we should not take his words at face value when he frequently spoke in the valence of a Republican, sometimes even impersonating his hero Teddy Roosevelt, advocating kicking some ass on America's enemies. All things balanced, HWA was a self-serving, self-aggrandizing douche.

BB

nck said...

BB

You just don t get it.

USA did not nuke Hanoi because it would have lost the MORAL authority that is and was the foundation of its power.

In the dollar the free world trust.

Not even the Soviets wanted to destroy the world as declassified documents show.

People like HWA basically with the clearance of central intelligence reiterated over and over again in bold not uncertain terms to all business and government executives that the USA WOULD be prepared to launch nuclear weapons if called upon.

This is according to official MAD policy. Diplomats like Armstrong basically reasured US allies and kept the real fear of MAD alive.

This has served the cause of peace well during the Cold War and certainly NEVER contradicted US foreign policy or military doctrine.

Ponder that.

Nck

nck said...

It was all part of a larger mass communication strategy propagating American values as Western values as special propaganda opp. Even BI theory HWAs bestseller propagated the brotherhood of "the five eyes."

The illegal pirate radio stations funded by wcg and cia brought pop music and accompanying cultural change to US allies and markets.

And yes government allows individual entrepreneurs to thrive as long as they abide by official policy.

Nck

Anonymous said...

6.28 PM
Yea, it should read God plane, in that our minds are made in Gods mental, psychological image. Nit picking is not a admirable trait.

Byker Bob said...

And then, we must ponder Truman, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. But, I do agree that HWA resembled many a MAD Magazine satire. That's probably why he was so fond of Basil Wolverton, and made him an elder!

BB

Byker Bob said...

J Edgar Hoover, Southern Baptists and other conservative Christians, far right Republicans, and others including Herbert W. Armstrong all held rock n roll music as played on the outlaw pirate stations responsible for the destruction of western civilization. HWA described listening to rock music as being "tuned in to Satan". Had "The World Tomorrow" not been on the Pirate Stations, he would have seen them as a communist plot. So, apparently, he didn't mind using "the devil's" media to cultivate his tithe farm.

You are right about one thing. I will never "get" you, or understand where you are coming from. You are fun to have around for the sake of discussion, kind of like the eccentric professorial types we all enjoyed at college or university.

BB

nck said...

The essence of Mutual Assured Destruction strategy is the believe that the opponent will execute the plan. Even if projecting or perhaps being "Gods chosen" benign and benevolent heedee of humanistic and godly values. The other party MUST believe that you are prepared to distroy all.

The reason you "dont get it" is because you go by 2 assumptions. 1 being that HWA was a con man who did not himself believe what he preached WRONG. 2 being that governments or hoover actually care what people believe as long as they are in tune with official policy.

And I will cite Charley Wilson or the creation of Al Quida, the inciting of Islam as a political ideology, as a bullwark against the Soviets by the USA.

POP Music.
Exactly. The destruction of the order that was, replacing it with American culture and consumerism.

If you do not get that last concept than you do not understand the current world order and structure. UN, IMF, World Bank, Trade Rounds on free trade "the unseen hand" etc etc

Hoover did not have the funds to cover psych opp versus European rigid nationalism and hwa needed his message out changing the face and culture of britain and europe. 1 plus 1 is two.

A kind of mental Marshal plan.
Even Elvis Presley would have understood that concept since first he served abroad and 2 he could prove it by the numbers of record sales.

Man just go visit Myanmar. After decades of dictatorship first thing you are able to acquire is a hamburger, coke and leave the citizens to smile.

3rd assumtion. Americanization is not necessarily bad. It just requires a break with traditional way of doing things and base an economy on consumption. That requires the belief that God wants to make you succesful and karma is of your choosing.

Nck

Anonymous said...

Dropping the atomic bombs on Japan was mainly a psychological ploy. The air force was already carpet bombing the country, so the added destruction by the atomic bombs was not significant.
Which reminds me, Herb on a few occasions wrote that it was Americas industrial might that won the second world war, so that in WW 3, American industry will be targeted first. I always got the impression that Herbie was teaching Americas enemies how to defeat America in the next war. Traitor!!

nck said...

BB

I also find it fun to see you use an argument about a propaganda station and next post deny the power of radio mass broadcasting. Then you argue that (modern) music has been a powerful voice in finding your personal journey and next you deny the government the ability to have recognized this force and use it in furthering their aim in establishing markets in baby boom nations. How many youngsters are swayed by boring economic debates or political theory when they can dance, do away the shackles of a dying culture and live the reality of dynamic consumerism keeping you exited with the latest fashion always. Ah those exiting sixties and "strange bedfellows."

In a way HWA made his fortune on the societal transition he railed at. Hegels dialectic!

Nck

nck said...

re 10:05"Dropping the atomic bombs on Japan was mainly a psychological ploy."

-The dropping of the bomb saved many lives both Japanese and Allied
(very interesting to read on the level of negotiations on the terms of surrender before the bomb and also the status of the emperor was a major point of contention) Like Germany American Grand Strategy would not have been served by a German and Japanese nation reduced to the stone age. Grand Strategy reguired markets for products and allies versus the Soviet Communist threat to those markets
-It contained the element of revenge//like Dresden which served no strategic purpose
-It sent a message to the Soviets on the European theater of war

nck

Anonymous said...

Nck
The Wikipedia article on the Dresden bombing claims otherwise. It states that it was a major transportation and communication centre which had 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the war effort.
Please, no Nazi propaganda.

Anonymous said...

Some individual, who seemed to idolize/worship HWA, said: "I tell them, without God working through Mr. Armstrong, they would not even know the Truth or have been given an opportunity to be a part of the Church of God at this time. I pray they can see through the deception and come back to the foundation. May we all hold fast to these precious truths we have been given!"

HWA gave us some Milk (truth from the Bible about basic doctrines - e.g. Hebrews 6:1-2; 5:12-13).

That Milk should only have been a short weaning period, temporary, thing - 1Pe 2:2 "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:"

HWA gave us lots of Junk Food (mis-understood Bible prophecies and wrong timing - e.g Mickey Mouse Millennium of Jesus Christ soon reigning on earth for 1,000 years).

Today, the xcog leaders and their followers are still basking in that Milk and Junk Food, unable to see through the deceptions they have bought into.

What kind of a "foundation" is that for anyone? A HWA foundation didn't work! It still doesn't work, except to keep them in bondage, as though held captive, and blind, many getting weary, going luke-warm, etc.

For those interested in salvation, the Bible says: "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common SALVATION, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." Jude 1:3

It does not say to: "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto HWA!"

I wonder if the one "idolizing/worshipping," apparently, HWA is still praying for all of the rest of us? I wonder if that individual has since looked at the fingers on his/her own hand and since been able to see how deceived he/she is? He/she said: "...I pray they can see through the deception..."

Like what deception? To cite only one example (& there are numerous others examples), using the original hard copy book "Mystery of the Ages"?

Chapter 1: WHO AND WHAT IS GOD? Page 41, HWA wrote: "So here we find revealed originally two Personages. One is God. And with God in that prehistoric time was another Personage who also was God--one who later was begotten and born as Jesus Christ."

And then we have what follows:

"For thus saith the high and lofty ONE that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones." Isaiah 57:15

I Tim 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.
:17 Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy;"

Jesus Christ did not have that immortality.......UNTIL GOD the Father, that One God, gave it to Him!

John 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

Besides that, Jesus Christ said of Himself:

John 5:19 "Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself..."

John 5:30 "I can of mine own self do nothing..."

Would God, that High and Lofty One, ever say that of Himself?

Of course not!

To be continued…

John

Anonymous said...

Continued…

Besides, if that all wasn't enough, Jesus Christ had a beginning. The Word had a beginning. But that One God had no beginning. Now, that thought is a difficult one for people to handle, .......but to say that there were two of them??????? I can't swallow that for two (Twinity? Duality? Whatever!), or three (Trinity?)!

Yet, page 42, HWA wrote: "God also had existed eternally with the Word. Jesus, when he was "the Word," was an immortal being who had existed ALWAYS--there never was a time when he did not exist--without beginning of days."

And page 57, HWA wrote: "God is Creator of all that exists. Both God and the Word (who became Christ) have existed eternally and before all else."

A scribe told Christ: "...Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:" Mark 12:32

Paul acknowledged that One God, which was NOT Jesus Christ:

"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him." I Cor 8:6

Jesus did acknowledge the One God, His/our Father: "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." John 20:17

Isaiah was inspired to say: "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else." Isaiah 45:22

I look forward to the day when God fulfills the following words and they are reality:

"...God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them;..." 2 Cor 5:19

And time will tell...

John

P.S. For any desiring to understand more about the interaction between that One God and the created Word, then one may, for example, look up Proverbs 8:22-30, do your own study, and look up such words/phrases as:

formed
possessed
set up
brought forth
brought up
etc.

Byker Bob said...

Whatever the case may be, instead of living for now, being the best person you can be, impacting everything around you in a positive way, and raising a good family, Armstrongism plugs you into filtering your life and understanding through ancient, ancient things that you can't possibly fully investigate or cross-check, like paganism and living under the old covenant. Armstrongism becomes the primary source for all of the information on these things, along with their carefully selected and cherry-picked reference works. And, then, they flash forward to the prophecies for which they claim to have the only true understanding, and claim that these prophecies will hit all of the people who have no knowledge of the real law that is in effect, and the pagan influences in which people unwittingly participate today. Mixed heritage people whose ancestors went through numerous assimilation processes are to be held responsible for having forgotten the customs of a small part (if any) of their ancestry as if they had wilfully and knowingly turned their backs on them at some point in their contemporary lives. Also, apparently, God is only capable of educating humans through worst case disasters, as opposed to mentoring.

It's all based on a preposterous premise, yet somehow they got 150,000 people to believe in and support it. Better, deeper understanding of history has killed off the back end, and continued failure of prophecy has debunked the front end, yet some continue to wear their blinders and expect HWA to be vindicated. You can't make the case that nobody is being hurt by it all, because if you weren't hurt or damaged in some way, you are a rare anomaly.

Hopefully, more and more will shake out of their Stockholm Syndrome in time to have at least a partially positive and productive life, but we know that others will not.

BB

Anonymous said...

John,
Yours is the JW take in Christ being a created being. Can a created being pay for the sins of mankind? No, since only a being that has existed for eternity has a worth that exceeds the worth of mankind. The JW play this game since they have usurped Christ's role for all intents and purposes. Herbs ministers do the same by treating members lives as their personal property. The ministers believe that they own the members. That's what all the member complaints of being treated like children amounts to.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:40 PM, I do not know, nor care, about JW games, nor what the "JW take in Christ being a created being" is all about, but it appears that God has set up a perfect Plan of Salvation to save humanity and eventually take/destroy Satan and his angels. Yes, angels can be destroyed, even though HWA taught that could not happen...another one of them Junk Food, satanic theories, which is another lie of: I wonder who? John 8:44

God will run His Plan His way. Scriptures appear to indicate that Christ, the Passover Lamb slain from before the foundation of the world, was all part of God's Plan. The Word happens to be the first person or thing in a series that God created. All other parts of God's creation followed that creation.

As far as pay for the sins of mankind goes: there is sin in your/my life. The wages for you/me is death. Both of us will reap those wages, along with the rest of humanity. That is how your/our wages are paid; there is no other penalty. When you are resurrected there is no other penalty to pay; you paid it! God is not into "Double Jeopardy" and He isn't an "Indian-giver." Well, maybe I shouldn't use that phrase, but Romans 6:23 told us told us that death would be followed by eternal life.

You mentioned ministers treating their members badly causing complaints. Well, we're all going to learn to hate evil. And we're going to learn that one can't get good fruit from an evil tree. Fortunately, or unfortunately, such is life......and death. Yes, death has to occur. It has been "...appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" Heb 9:27

The xcog's directed by another spirit, pushing out their fake news about another gospel and another Jesus is just a lot of evil. We're going to learn to hate the evil. Don't hate the people. People wrestle one another, but the principalities are the real problem. How do them principalities affect the ministers? Study Matthew 23 b/c Jesus Christ exposed what was driving the Pharisees, who were not in existence, or alive, during the period of time that "...the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias..." occurred (Matthew 25:35). However, another generation was in existence: Satan and his angels...a generation of evil spirit beings, which will eventually be destroyed...time will tell!

I quoted 2 Cor 5:19 in my previous post. It said that "...God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, NOT IMPUTING their TRESPASSES unto them..."

Guess what? That is part of the judgment, part of God's judgment: His decision. Do you want something to supplement those words of 2 Cor 15? If so, then try this:

Christ, regarding humanity, is yet going to say: "...Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom PREPARED for you FROM the foundation of the world:" Matthew 25:34

It's just part of a Plan, and part of the "Good News!"

What else is part of God's judgment?

Christ, regarding Satan and his angels, is yet going to say: "...Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" Matthew 25:41

Huh? In summary, Satan and his angels "...shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal." Matthew 25:46

It's all just part of a Plan, and part of the "Good News!"

Because of what God the Father, by His Spirit, did through/by Jesus Christ enables you and I to live again. We are saved by His life; are we not? Life is a gift of God; is it not? God does it, but in time we will know because...

Time will tell.

John

Anonymous said...

John,
If Christ is a created being, why should God do anything through him. You did not answer my point of why a created being has more worth than all of humanity, allowing his death to pay for everyone's sins.

If Christ is a created being, that means that reality had already been created and defined. That means that there is not enough left for Christ to do to earn his present power and status. Basic reality ( cause and effect) defies your point.

Anonymous said...

BB
I disagree. The book of Acts is about God mentoring humanity. God gave mankind a fresh start, which it largely blew. God sent his prophets over and over to warn his people before he sent in his punishing armies. The warnings were typically over several generations.
The end time prophecies are there in the bible for all to see. You insist on fusing HWA with the bible. They are in fact separate.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:01 PM

You asked: "...If Christ is a created being, why should God do anything through him." God can do what He wants. Who will resist Him? Who will disannul His will, and His Plan?

Review those verses I cited where Christ told us that of Himself He could do nothing! With those verses in mind your question makes even more sense, but God is going to work out His Plan His way, whether you agree or not, whether you have your own theories or not and they disagree with God's will.

Why not? God the Father has no beginning and He is forever. The Word had a beginning. Jesus Christ had a beginning. God has a purpose for everything He creates.

You say I did not answer your point about a created being having more worth than all humanity to pay for everyone's sins. Yes, I did answer that question, and you didn’t agree with my comments. Who told you that stuff about worth? Was it the same individual that told us that spirit beings can't be destroyed? I mentioned Romans 6:23 and told you that for the sins in your life: you will pay the wages with/by your own death.

So, where does Christ have to have all that worth you spoke of. Christ, whether created or not, wasn't going to pay for the sins in your life...or the sins of all humanity. Period! Perhaps you should think: "No wonder it was appointed unto man once to die!"

God has chosen to reconcile humanity (2 Cor 5:19) to Himself; He takes care of that, but how will you live again? Why should you be resurrected? That is a step beyond reconciliation and has to do with Christ's life: not His death. God does have choice and He chooses to do all of this His way and not the way of HWA, or your way, or my way.

"For if, when we were enemies, we were RECONCILED [[2 Cor 5:19]] to God BY the DEATH of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." Romans 5:10

And when you are resurrected, where were your sins? Won't you come up sinless? What is there to judge? Condemn? Of course, God sent His Son NOT to CONDEMN the world (John 3:17), but who really believes that?

Why not just be thankful that you shall be saved by Christ's life? HWA said something like: "Don't believe me. Believe your Bible." I believe Romans 5:10 and I'm thankful for those words.

To be con’t

John

Anonymous said...

Continuing…

Anon 11:01 PM, you mentioned something about Christ earning some "present power and status." Where did you get that? Many people think they can earn salvation by their own works, their choices, their "goodness," their righteousness, etc. Is that what you have in mind? Do you think you must earn salvation? Do you think Christ needed to do something to qualify somehow for something? If so, what scriptures do you use to come Christ and His worth? Can you cite scriptures for what you believe and why you say the things you said? You had to get them from someplace.

God has an unconditional love for humanity. Yes, Adam and Eve were created with "very good" human nature (Gen 1:31). Yes, God created a tree of knowledge of good and evil, but also yes, that tree had nothing to do with choice or God's Holy Spirit. If you remember, Adam was given a command: paraphrasing, "Don't eat of that particular tree and continue to live, or eat it and you shall die." Yes, God allowed another created being, Satan, a most subtil beast, to enter the Garden and by his spirit infest/infect the minds of Adam and Eve with evil traits BEFORE doing anything with the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but do you want to know what those traits are? Look into the mirror b/c you and I have those same traits within us...or go read Romans 1 and Galatians 5. You will see some of those traits listed there. No wonder this world is in such a mess, but it is only temporary and it is allowed within a creation MADE SUBJECT (no choice on our part) to VANITY (Rom 8:20)! We are learning to hate evil. How to flee evil, and depart from evil, is a challenge; isn't it? We do need some help; don't we? Of ourselves, as with Adam and Eve, it appears we, of and by ourselves, can do nothing...and life and death continue on. Death is the last enemy, but for humanity death isn't forever. Death is only a temporary cessation from life. God is forever. Christ, now, is forever. Satan, many think, is forever, but in reality Satan is only "for," b/c there will be no "ever" attached to that "for."

Going back to your fist question of why God would do anything through a created being? I suppose more verses could be cited, but for now I just say, as Christ taught us:

"Thy Will be done!"

BTW, once upon a time, I too expressed very similar thoughts to the ones you brought up.

And time will tell if God's, The Father's, Will was really done or not...

John

Byker Bob said...

I don't personally fuse HWA with the Bible for the purpose of conducting my own everyday life, 11:13. However, this is a blog which treats the false teachings of, and damages caused by Armstrongism. Therefore, I confine my argumentation to an Armstrong-based perspective.

I seldom post about my own beliefs these days because some of the non-believers take great umbrage with the possibility that anyone could still believe, and the discussions veer off course from the things that would help Armstrong culties see the light, escape pastoral abuse and oppression, and find some better answers and a better life.

BB

Anonymous said...

John,
Your post is typical of many people I knew in the church. Your problem is of not understanding basic reality. You live in land Coo Coo, some sort of Disneyland. Your 'God can do what He wants' is so typical, and ridiculous. God does not, let me repeat, God does not rule by whim. God is a God of law and order and harmony. He would not made your created creature Christ our saviour for no good reason.
Many times my bible tells me that our sins were PAID FOR by Christ's blood, so His worth must exceed that of all humanity. This is basic reality. You cannot buy a new Rolls Royce with $20.
If you look around you, all power and status is EARNED. Again basic reality. Scripture support? "Give honour to whom honour is due,' or 'a workman is worthy of his wages (which includes honour, status). Or 'the chief seat belongs to the chief servant (the seat is earned). Even when Hitler was in power, he had to constantly court his people and military. Hitler knew power and status had to be continually earned, but no, not you. In your fantasy world things are different. Anyway it's there in the parable of the talents. Power and status and emotional currency must be earned.
You live in a fairy land and twist scripture to support your illusion.
I by contrast strive to believe in the absolutism of reality.

Questeruk said...

The Bible seems very clear that Jesus Christ, the Word, could not logically have been a created being.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

So the Word, identified as Jesus Christ, created ALL things. In fact verse 3 emphasizes that without Him was not anything made that was made. That is all inclusive.

The angels, the universe, the earth itself, all life on earth, anything that was created.

Since the Word made ALL things, the Word couldn’t be one of these ‘created things’.

If He were a created being, then there would have been something that He didn’t make – Himself. In order for Jesus to have created everything there is, He has to be God, and He has to have eternally existed.







Anonymous said...

John
The Catholic pope is with you. At least he is upfront about rejecting Jesus.

"Pope Francis has been caught on camera attempting to steer his flock away from Jesus Christ, warning that “having a personal relationship with Jesus is dangerous and very harmful“.

Breaking with centuries of Christian tradition, Pope Francis told a crowd of 33,000 Catholics in Rome that “a personal, direct, immediate relationship with Jesus Christ” must be avoided at all costs, raising fears he is an illegitimate pope with a sinister agenda."

John G said...

Anon 11:29 AM you emphasized the phrase "PAID FOR." Would you please cite what verse(s) you had in mind that uses that phrase?

You also said: "...God does not, let me repeat, God does not rule by whim. God is a God of law and order and harmony. He would not made your created creature Christ our saviour for no good reason..."

I agree, God does everything for some purpose. He always does things decently and in order.

John

Anonymous said...

Questeruk said: "...Since the Word made ALL things, the Word couldn’t be one of these ‘created things’. If He were a created being, then there would have been something that He didn’t make – Himself..."

That's correct, the Word didn't make himself. The One God created the Word and made him part of the Godhead.

God, the Father, has no beginning or end. The Word and Jesus Christ both had a beginning. You cited John 1:1, "In the beginning (Strong's 746) was the Word..."

Strong's says for 746 the following:

1) beginning, origin
2) the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader
3) that by which anything begins to be, the origin, the active cause
4) the extremity of a thing
4a) of the corners of a sail
5) the first place, principality, rule, magistracy
5a) of angels and demons

If the Word is, for example: "the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader," then one would think that there may then be persons or things to follow within that series.

You could say a similar thing for Jesus Christ. For example, within the creation series the Word came into existence, and other persons or things followed in that series, such as this - God created the Word...the Word created lots of things (including angels, Adam, Eve)...the Word was MADE flesh, which is Jesus Christ...Firstfruits are sealed...etc.

Almost as an aside, over 2 decades ago (about 1994), I read a paper written by someone, who made an interesting explanation regarding John 1:1. It follows between the ******.
******
"...Now let's look at John 1:1.

** **** ** * ***** *** * ***** ** **** *** **** *** **** ** * *****[[* to left represent the Greek translation, which I cannot copy and paste here]] (John 1:1)

Translated in the same word order this reads:

"In beginning was the Word and the Word was WITH the God and God was the Word."

The expression "with the God" is the Greek phrase "PROS TON THEON", the Accusative case. Two separate individuals are implied ... being WITH each other, face to face.

There is no reason anywhere in this verse to question the correctness of the translation ... "and the Word was WITH God".

******
If you are interested in seeing that actual Greek, then google search for the paper titled "THE GREEK PREPOSITION "PROS" AND JOHN 1:1" by Frank W. Nelte

Now, Frank made no big deal "WITH the God", b/c He was out to demonstrate a different point, but I would go on to say that yes, God was the Word; however, the Word is NOT "The God."

Additionally, we may read:

"And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely." Rev 21:6

Yes, Jesus Christ had a "beginning." He is part of a series. Before Jesus Christ, there was the Word. And before the Word was The God, The God who has no beginning, but He did begin a fantastic creation with the creation of the Word, from which it appears everything else followed.

Rev 21:6 does not say: "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. Oh, there are 2 of us...and that "other guy!" I say that facetiously.

I am not interested in arguing this with anyone. It matters not, as far as The God's Plan of Salvation to save humanity and destroy Satan and his angels is concerned, whether we believe the Word was created or uncreated. Life goes on and

Time will tell...

John

Anonymous said...

John
It takes years of studying engineering to be able to design a bridge. All the scientists combined cannot create a simple life form. Yet your created Jesus magically has the knowledge and experience to design other angels, animals and plants.
Your created Jesus only exists in your imagination.
Ancient Israel asked God to give them a king. Yours is the same story. You want God the Father and Christ to be figureheads, with ministers being the real rulers.
We already have that today, and how's that working out?

Byker Bob said...

Hint: Once this "one God" or "created being" Arianism sets in, people believe they have secret knowledge and will never turn loose of it. An argument on this topic between one infected person and an entire forum went on for about five years, deep, deep conclusive scriptures were introduced, and the dude never budged. Eventually, every binitarian and trinitarian walked away from that forum, because that one dude couldn't make a single comment without injecting some "one God" zinger. Eventually, both sides became mean-spirited.

If you encounter a one godder, best to ignore, not to pick that scab. Once you pick it, it will ooze pus and blood forever more.

BB

Anonymous said...

How's that working out ?? You tell us anon 11:15 for you write like a pastor. Israel rejected God true but men worship God with their lips and their hearts are far from Him. Many talk the correct talk of Jesus but don't walk the walk. The are more pastors and Co on here than anywhere else.

Questeruk said...


Well John I don’t intend to get into a long drawn out discussion on this.

However in summary John 1v3 says (referring to the Word):-

“All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

Our differences seem to be that I am taking that verse at face value, but you seem to be taking it to mean:-

“All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made (except that God the Father previously made the Word)”.

You take it to mean what you like, but in reality that part in brackets is not in the original, it is a Questeruk addition!

Anonymous said...

BB
The problem with that peace of advice, and similar, is that you comprehend something from personal experience. Other people and future generations have a right to learn the same lessons from personal experience as well. Which is why God has given us our own lives. I hate it when people pre empt me from learning something first hand. It's like someone spoiling a movie I'm about to see, by giving away the plot.

Anonymous said...

1:24 am, fact-checking:

https://www.truthorfiction.com/pope-francis-relationships-jesus-dangerous/

Byker Bob said...

Bad plot, 4:07, and very bad dinner music! It's a movie I wish I'd had an opportunity to skip. Ruined my favorite Forum. But, fortunately, when Gary left it, he started up this blog, and a couple of us matriculated to here.

BB

Anonymous said...

Questeruk
We are told to live by 'every word of God,' rather than some words of God. Hence when looking at a scripture, our whole body of knowledge needs to be applied to understanding the verse/s in question. Otherwise one can always juggle a verse or two to form unintended conclusions. Any interpretation must fit in with our overall bible knowledge and the way the world works. After all, the bible is a manual describing Gods created reality. To me, your interpretation clashes with basic reality, so no amount of your bible quoting will convince me otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:15 AM,

In an earlier comment I said: "...For any desiring to understand more about the interaction between that One God and the created Word, then one may, for example, look up Proverbs 8:22-30, do your own study, and look up such words/phrases as:

formed
possessed
set up
brought forth
brought up
etc.
..."

It appears you didn't do that, or you would not have said this: "...It takes years of studying engineering to be able to design a bridge. All the scientists combined cannot create a simple life form. Yet your created Jesus magically has the knowledge and experience to design other angels, animals and plants..."

Had you done that it would have been obvious that one Being was created by another Being and than it was taught, educated, etc. before other things were created. There is no magic to it. God does things decently and in order.

Think about your own belief? What is the difference between believing in the magical existence of a Trinity or a Twinity (as you seem to believe it)? Believing in the existence of one Being in existence is one thing, but to think that 2 eternally existed? That takes a lot more faith than I have to believe in that, but you are welcome to your magically belief in 2.

Jesus Christ did not inherently have eternal life within, like God the Father did/does. And a study of the NT also reveals that God the Father was still educating Jesus Christ.

When it come to God we read this: " Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." Acts 15:18

You can't say that about Jesus Christ, or the Word.

Additionally, we may also read this:

Deut 32:39 See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.

:40 For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever.

Again, neither the Word, nor Jesus Christ, can say "I live for ever."

The Word had a beginning. Jesus Christ had a beginning. God, The God, has no beginning, but you believe what you will.

We have no idea how much time went by from the creation of The Word to the time that the Word began creating anything. God does everything decently and in order.

Where did Israel come from? It came into existence by a miracle of God. If it weren't for that miracle, Israel would not even exist today.

The Word was made flesh, 100% flesh: made of flesh, blood and bone just like us, but how did that happen? Another miracle.

So, yes, as you wrote: "It takes years of studying engineering to be able to design a bridge. All the scientists combined cannot create a simple life form..." No doubt, but we do not know the timing involved for any of this. Christ in Rev 21:6 admitted there was a beginning involved with Him: believe it or not.

In John 6:45 Jesus Christ mentioned: "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me."

Jesus was taught of God and so was the word, but all be taught of God?

It will take another miracle and, but time will tell...

John

Yes and No to HWA said...

Anonymous John writes:

“Christ in Rev 21:6 admitted there was a beginning involved with Him: believe it or not.”

But Christ is not speaking in Rev 21:6 - it is God [the Father] speaking as the context shows:

Rev 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
Rev 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
Rev 21:7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

But Christ is speaking in Rev 22:13.

Rev 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

“In 1:8 and 21:6 it was God who identified himself as the Alpha and the Omega. Now the risen Christ applies the title to himself. Its meaning is essentially the same as that of the two following designations - “the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End” - the first of which Christ has already applied to himself in 1:17 and 2:8. The names set him apart from the entire created order. He is unlimited by time, and in that all things are found both in the Father and in the Son the attributes of the former belong to the latter as well” (Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, Revised, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, p.407).

Ge 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:
Ge 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Typology does suggest that the Word/Jesus Christ had a beginning; Eve being a type of Christ.

Heb 7:9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, paid tithes in Abraham.
Heb 7:10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.

And there is also a sense that the Word/Jesus Christ has always existed.

Isa 49:1 Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD [God] hath called me [Jesus Christ] from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.
Isa 49:3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel [Jesus Christ], in whom I [God] will be glorified.
Isa 49:6 And he [God] said, It is a light thing that thou [Jesus Christ] shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

While the Lord-servant is the most significant metaphor of God and Israel’s relation there is also the husband-wife and father-son relationship.

Jer 3:14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you:
Hos 11:1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.

In Christ’s case, the husband-wife relationship predominated at first while the father-son relationship is now predominated.

Gen 3:20 Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
1 Cor 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

Anonymous said...

July 21, 2017 @6:40 AM Isaiah 43:10 is the evidence from the Holy Bible that refutes HWA's "God Family" concept. You asked what is the name of the 3rd Person of the Godhead. His name is God the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19; Acts 5:3-4). At the core of HWA's "God Family" concept is not that "resurrected beings will live and grow for all eternity, becoming in many ways like God", but the belief that humans who are "true Christians" (i.e. part of the Armstrong COG's) will be born again and become God just as God is God. Please don't try to down play what HWA and his disciples teach regarding the "God Family" concept. That is deception. You wanted to see my cards, well there you have it my friend. HWA's "God Family" concept is polytheistic and idolatrous at its core and pagan in its origin. I therefore urge you and all the Armstrong splinter groups to repent of your sin of wanting to become God as God is God and to turn and worship the One True God (God the Father, God the Son - Jesus Christ, and God the Holy Spirit) and believe the gospel.

Anonymous said...

5.35 AM
I stated in another post that Herb the salesman exaggerated with his "become God just as God is God." And please don't treat us all as Herb drones. Some members, typically new ones, believed the "God is God" claim, but I don't believe that most of the older members did. It's not the way the world works. Even Christ when he was growing up as a human, was constantly studying and learning. That's the reality in the human realm, as well as the spirit realm. Otherwise the angels under Lucifer would not have failed. Have you studied science, organic chemistry, computer programming? Only someone with the ultra super brain of God the Father or similar would be able to design and program a animal. The human body alone is made up with over 2 million different chemical compounds. So no, your created Christ would never be able to acquire such knowledge or skills. Technically, God could give such skills to someone on a plate, but that defies the basic law of "you reap what you sow." So your created Christ does not exist.
Why does your point of view match that of the Jehovah Witnesses? As JW dissidents point out on YouTube, the Watchtower minimizes Christ because their 7 man governing body has usurped Christ's role. Kicking Christ off His thrown, and teaching others this sin, is living dangerously.

Anonymous said...

5.35AM
Your Math 28.19 and Acts 5.3 just uses "Holy Spirit" rather than your "God the Holy Spirit." Why do you play such games with me. This is also the ploy used often by the JWs where they quote a scripture, but it has no or almost no relevance to the claimed point. And from memory, there's a debate about the Math 28.19 translation. Some claim that the baptizing in the name if the holy spirit does not appear in early manuscripts. I would have to check, but it's the way I remember it.

Anonymous said...

Yes and No to HWA 2:38 AM said...

"...But Christ is not speaking in Rev 21:6 - it is God [the Father] speaking as the context shows:

Rev 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
Rev 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely..."

Verse 5 is clearly God the Father speaking. The personal pronoun "he" used in verse 6 is Jesus Christ speaking. God the Father has no beginning and no end. The Word that was made flesh was the first or thing God created before all else was created.

To save myself some writing following is a partial transcript of a sermon given by someone else about Nov 2000:
******
...Turn to Proverbs 8! This is a little bit different. Proverbs 8, in verse 22, it seems like a pretty innocent verse right here. It says:

Proverbs 8:22 “The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.”

Is this inspired? Is this in the Holy Scripture? This is another of those times you go: “Duh! Well, of course!”
It’s a cute little thing: the LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. Well, we can just go on then, huh? Well, now, let’s just kind of go back there and look at this a little bit. Let’s go back and look at this. Do you know what the word possessed means when you look it up? It means: create, or creating, redeeming his people! He talks about before the foundations; doesn’t He? It’s interesting: the word me there!...Proverbs 8:22 “The LORD possessed…”

Created:

“…me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.”

Before all of this creation! Before all of this stuff! Before bringing man on the earth: “God created me!” Hello! HELLO, wake-up call! There are some things you just can’t get around; is there?...
******
Jesus Christ had a beginning. The Word had a beginning. The Father has no beginning.

Time will tell...

John

Yes and No to HWA said...

Hi Anonymous John

We will have to agree to disagree on who is speaking in 21:6.

Revelation 21:1-8 may be considered a self-contained scene, entitled “The New Creation” (so Mounce), where the only divine-being present is God. Jesus Christ/the Word/Lamb does not feature.

Hence God is definitely speaking in speaking in 21:5 and 21:7 - “he that sat on the throne said” and “I will be his God”.

To introduced Jesus Christ based on what is said in 21:6 does not follow.

Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him [God] WHICH IS, AND WHICH WAS, AND WHICH IS TO COME; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;
Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ...
Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning [arche] and the ending, saith the Lord [God], WHICH IS, AND WHICH WAS, AND WHICH IS TO COME, the Almighty.

Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

I would suggest that God - the Lord, the Almighty - is “the Beginning” in 1:8.

“As the divine response to what has been said about Christ and his relationship to believers and the unbelieving world, God himself now speaks. Only here and 21:5ff. does God speak. He declares that he is “the Alpha and the Omega” (the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet). In 21:6 the same title is expanded and interpreted by the parallel expression, “the Beginning and End”... In 22:13 Jesus applies the same title to himself and adds the interpretive phrase, “the First and the Last” ... Alpha and Omega represent the Hebrew Aleph and Tau, which were regarded not simply as the first and last letters of the alphabet, but as including all the letters in between [cp. alpha and beta the first two letters of the Greek alphabet]. Hence, the title sets forth God as sovereign Lord over everything that takes place in the entire course of human history. Knox translates, “I am Alpha, I am Omega, the beginning of all things and their end” ” (Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, Revised, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, pp.51-52).

I would also suggest that arguing that Christ had a beginning based on the phrase “the beginning and the end” is not in conformity with Hebraic thought forms and linguistic expressions. It is reading into this phrase more than what the author intended.

(I am not against arguing that the Word had a beginning, the typology and account of the creation of Adam and Eve suggest this).

Ge 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Lk 18:19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

I would also suggest that arguing that “Isaiah 43:10 is the evidence from the Holy Bible that refutes HWA's "God Family" concept” is also reading into this verse more than what the author intended.