Tuesday, July 24, 2018

Reader Sorrowful About This Blog: Tread Lightly



A comment the other day:

I stumbled on your site today, and most of the articles and posts seem rather old. and most everything posted is very negative ripping church members and leaders for their sins and it reminds me of a Scripture where Jesus slapped several self righteous people where it hurts.  The Scripture????   John 8:7 So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first."
Even an Archangel wouldn't do what some of these people have done...Jude 19 Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!"   another Scripture tells us... Luke 6:37 "Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.   
Tread lightly folks, I want mercy not what I deserve and you should too!   But, He who is without sin among you keep judging!
                                                                                                                                                                                                Regards,                                                                                         Sanford Sorrow


30 comments:

Anonymous said...

Isn't it interesting that the ACOG leaders feel very comfortable publicly impugning the character of people like the Scarboroughs, yet when those leaders receive even a small taste of the same treatment they dish out, their lackeys and apologists rush to cite scriptures demanding mercy.

I'll show HWA the same mercy he showed his daughter Dorothy while he molested her.

I'll show Rod Meredith the same mercy he showed Patrick and Elizabeth Scarborough when they begged for a fair hearing to be reunited with their LCG friends.

I'll show Rod McNair the same mercy he showed those couples whose marriages he destroyed in order to tighten his grip on power in Charlotte.

I'll show LCG the same mercy that Christ showed to the moneychangers who desecrated the house of God. As long as liars and power-mongers claim to be the rulers of the Church of God, I'll follow Christ's example and look forward to the day when the tables are turned and they receive the same cruel treatment they bestowed on their members.

Anonymous said...


"..disputed about the body of Moses"

Um, FYI, Moses never existed

Byker Bob said...

That’s certainly one perspective, and you are entitled to your opinion.

However, Ian Boyne took what he read here in an “iron sharpens iron” mode. I think that is a marvelous example.

Also, people who are healing from spiritual rape do have to process and vocalize what happened to them in order for them to heal. I hope you are not suggesting that Armstrongist ministers are not to be held accountable That would be a grave mistake.

BB

Ed said...

So we should never raise our voices while the sheep are being abused because that is being hypocritical and judgemental. We should never expose the leaders of armstrongism for the con men that they are because we ourselves are imperfect.

How absurd!

Anonymous said...

Who is judging ? I find here first hand accounts of personal experiences within Ambassador College and WCG right up to many of the modern day COG organisations. Where is the stone throwing judgment in sharing first hand accounts on various situations both historic and upto date ?

Floyd 1944 said...

Dear Mr Sanford Sorrow,

I will assume you just stumbled onto this site. I will assume you are not a member of the old Worldwide Church of God or a splinter church that was formed from the WCG. I will assume you don’t know about the WCG founder, Herbert W Armstrong raping and molesting his daughter for years from about the age of 13 to late teens or 20s. All this time he was claiming God was revealing new knowledge to him about Bible prophecy. He predicted that Christ would return over and over, each time he said it would in the next few years. He said over and over it would be in the decade of the 40,s 50,s, 60,s, 70,s, 80,s till he died.

Members are required to keep the weekly Saturday sabbath. Members are required to keep the annual holy days. Members are required to travel to the feast of tabernacles. The member is required to take 8 days plus travel time. If your boss won’t give you the time off then you quit. You are required to save 10% of your income for these feasts. You are required to send in another 10% to headquarters. Also you are required to give holy day offerings on each high day. Next you are required to give 3rd tithe offering every 3rd and 6th year to headquarters. This is supposed to be used for widows, orphans, poor and the ministers. There is no accounting where any of this money goes.

In some of the splinter churches, you are asked to give more. One such group says you must give everything to the church. The Living Church of God asked their members to take out equity loans, withdraw 401k or savings and give it to the church. Wills and trusts should name the church as beneficiaries.

Members cannot associate with members of their own families. This is taught in some of the splinters. Members are taught they must obey their minister. Disagreement with the minister will get that person kicked out of their church.

If the members does not follow their church they will be captured by invading German armies and tortured. Only the good qualifying members wii be spared torture, the good ones will be spared in a place of safety. Then when Christ returns, the good church members will live for ever, those who don’t qualify wii be thrown into the lake of fire. People who claim to be Christian are not, they are so called Christians. They will be tortured by the Germans because they didn’t keep the Saturday sabbath, holy days, ate pork, and didn’t tithe all the 3 tithes.

These are some of things people on this blog write about. I think these church groups are cult and some are dangerous. Some have committed suicide over some of these teachings.

So Mr Sanford Sorrow, if warning our family members and friends is judging it seems to me you are judging us. For the record I don’t condem anyone, that will be God,s prerogative. I too pray for mercy, but I will say what I have seen and experienced.

Jim-AZ



Anonymous said...

John 8:11

"The Woman Caught in Adultery
…10Then Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are your accusers? Has no one condemned you?” 11“No one, Lord,” she answered. “Then neither do I condemn you, Jesus declared. “Now” go and sin no more. 12Once again, Jesus spoke to the people and said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows Me will never walk in the darkness, but will have the light of life.”…"

The biggest thing here is "Go, and sin NO MORE". Followed by "Whoever follows ME will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

The COG's are not ignorant in what they know is going on. Many have known exactly what has been happening in the COG's from the very beginning - especially ministers and high ranking people. This has been going on for over 50 years. Many people, however, are not so versed. All it takes is a weak, broken-hearted, genuine searcher looking for God to get snared by one of these WOLVES to have their whole life crash down into a bottomless pit of oppression, depression, and submission to a very dark and hopeless regime, stuck in an obsolete and broken system that Jesus Himself took care of many millennia ago.

It is the duty and responsibility of those who have been through the mill of the COG's to ensure that new people have knowledge so they do not fall into the pits of darkness that masquerade as rays of light and hope, when they are nothing of the sort. It is pretty obvious that this poster is distressed and using the "judge not" verses in the hope that that causes those who see what is going on to simply shut up, and let the COG scam continue unabated.

Jesus said "Go and sin no more". A great majority of these COG leaders has no intention of ever stopping the oppression of the poor, the bondage of the free, the reigning in of the abuses they constantly throw, the condemnation of millions of people who have pure hearts in service to God,the plugging up of minds that could be used for such awesome potential that are instead subservient to the blocked minds of power hungry, authoritative, controlling, abusive men, people who have no problem with stealing tens of thousands of dollars from members in the name of God for their own purposes, who control people's relationships, who threaten people with their very salvation for trivial matters. They continue in their regime, thinking it is light, when it is darkness. Do they have ANY INTENTION to "Go and sin no more? No, instead, they turn this scripture on their members for daring to voice or act in any way that they can not control, no matter how good-hearted or loving the action may be. They block hearts and minds if they threaten their power. And Armstrong apologists expect people to sit back and not say anything because they might be "judging". Judging is God's business, yes. But it would be morally reprehensible to sit back and keep watching people get sucked into the abyss that is Armstrongism.

The COG's have had many opportunities to "Go, and sin no more", yet they continue their oppressive and harmful and abusive regimes in the name of God. Who will stand up for the victims? Who will stand up and tell them what's REALLY going on, so they can clear the fog, and so they can see? Who will stand in the gap for them? What would be more wrong? Shutting up because of fear of "judging", or showing the victims of cruel oppression the way to life???

The ministers know full WELL what is going on, no matter how delusional they may be. The victims are the ones hurting and suffering and destitute - many with the very best of intentions. Those here who talk about what's happening do so not in judgement - but with spotlights to help the victims. THEY are the ones who need to know so they can be free - the ministers? No one here's judging them. They're judging themselves.

Mickey said...

Unfortunately it seems the commenter has internalized the arguments used by leaders in Armstrongism to silence internal critics with shame and thought control. The lesson appears to have been well learned.

Given Jesus' track record in calling out those who used religion to oppress, I suspect that the verses cited do not give the whole picture. For example, at one point Jesus states that the weightier matters of the law are judgement, mercy and faith. He advises his disciples to be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves.

But before the mercy aspect is latched onto, it would be wise for the commenter to realize tbat this blog is followed by a mix of people who may or may not identify as christian. But a common theme is a desire to be free of the old thought constricting tactics employed by using scripture to shame and control.

Using scripture in the way it was used in the wwcg (or any of its splinters) is a pointless and annoying activity.

I'm glad that the commenter read some of the information. I hope that s/he can get past the emotions expressed/felt and take in some of the facts.

Anonymous said...

Judge not . . . it is my understanding that judging other's actions is fine, we see it throughout the NT. The passage refers to being a hypocrite, judging others for the same sin you are guilty of committing. First, take the beam out of your own eye. . .
then you can judge. Paul confronted Peter. Paul told the Corinthian church to kick out the immoral brother, etc. GTA should never have condemned others for immoral behavior. HWA should not condemn others for pride and greed.

seekingtruth7 said...

I find it unbelievable that there are enough WCG splinter groups left to still fuel this site!

RSK said...

"Unfortunately it seems the commenter has internalized the arguments used by leaders in Armstrongism to silence internal critics with shame and thought control."

Assuming our commenter is not a ministurd looking for quotable reactions. Unlikely though. Theyre a comparatively lazy bunch, theyd probably just make it up.

Hoss said...

"Go and sin no more..."

FWIW, this story was not in the earliest manuscripts, and I first learned of its late inclusion from Bart Ehrman. However, if understood correctly, the story is consistent with Torah law: it has to do with any of the accusers being valid witnesses, and obviously none were. And what also is usually neglected is that Jesus was being set up: "This they said to test him..."
But, there are a number of scriptures that say that those in error should be corrected. You don't have to be sinless to tell someone their theology is messed up or their conduct is unbecoming.

Anonymous said...

The 'judge that you not be judged' is a William Tyndale translation that is debatable. It's often believed to be condemning hash judgment. A problem with hash judgments, including the woman caught in adultery, is that it is often partially applied. Christs trial and death, with Barabbas being set free, is a good example.

With the ministers, an accusation against members is a sentence, but it's immoral for members to evaluate minister behavior. The ministers do not have a right to a moral blank check. They do not have a right to a double standard. Members have a right and responsibility to pass moral judgement on the ministers. It's inherent in 'beware of wolves in sheep's clothing.'

Anonymous said...

If the adulteress was "caught in the very act" then the man would have to be there too. Since he wasn't, we can assume that she wasn't really caught in the act.

Byker Bob said...

Or the Pharasissies let him go because he was one of their buds.

BB

Anonymous said...

I've noticed that the odd comment on this blog is mimicked in splinter group articles afterwards. Well, at least we know that they are reading Banned.

Questeruk said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
'If the adulteress was "caught in the very act" then the man would have to be there too. Since he wasn't, we can assume that she wasn't really caught in the act.'

You really think so?

In the sexist society of the day, much more likely that the man was allowed to make his escape!

It goes on throughout the ages - For how many years did Harvey Weinstein get away with things?

Anonymous said...

It's often believed to be condemning hash judgment. A problem with hash judgments, including the woman caught in adultery, is that it is often partially applied.

"These potatoes are an abomination!"

Hoss said...

"caught in the very act"

And that is a weakness in the case of HWA's alleged incest. And in Torah law, you need at least two witnesses in agreement.

DennisCDiehl said...

Anonymous said...
If the adulteress was "caught in the very act" then the man would have to be there too. Since he wasn't, we can assume that she wasn't really caught in the act."

No, we can assume the man was either a friend of the Pharisees, another Pharisee or that in that culture, multiple relationships for men was not as bad as for a woman. Recall that one of the qualifications for an Elder was being "the husband of ONE wife" etc.

The no adultery rules were more a function of birth control and knowing who the daddy might be so papa did not end up losing his property and stuff to the child of another man thinking or being told it was his. Stoning was a loyalty and birth control guarantee the man.

One also has to wonder, as I did as a kid, just how the accusers caught them in the very act. Was it a set up? Were they voyeurs?

DennisCDiehl said...

and too...I'd like to suggest the story, which all agree was a later addition to the text where Jesus is being called a bastard born of fornication (John 8) was added to lessen the charge against Jesus and to send the message "leave Mary alone", she is forgiven. In the tale Jesus is said to have bent down and written in the sand. Other accounts imply he was drawing a circle of protection, symbolically, around the woman. Jesus may have written the names of other women those men "knew" well. Of course this implies super natural knowledge on Jesus part or that he was at least deep into the politics and gossip of the day too.

All to send the message that no matter what they think Jesus own birth circumstances were, "you guys are of your father the devil. Leave my mom out of this."

Anonymous said...


“Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, 'The Lord rebuke you!'”


The Lord rebuke you, Gerald Flurry.

The Lord rebuke you, David Pack.

The Lord rebuke you, Ronald Weinland.

The Lord rebuke you, Robert Thiel.

Connie Schmidt said...

Mr. Sorrow-

I am a sinner.

This however, does not require me to be blind to spiritual abuse being perpetrated on people. Just how do you propose that the egregious behaviors and actions that are happening in the COGs be addressed, revealed and rectified?

To stand by and say or do nothing, would be a sin as well.

Anonymous said...

4.11 AM
An abomination? How so? My bible says that since Joseph was a just man, he did not deliver Mary to the authorities when it looked like she had committed adultery.

Byker Bob said...

Yup. They want to be able to discuss these things in their own closed and controlled environments so that they can put their own ACOg approved spin on them. Freedom of discourse is too much of an advanced concept for them, let alone people doing their own due diligence and drawing their own conclusions.

BB

Anonymous said...

Yes i agree anon 1:53 I have noticed that phenomenon too. The comments and themes of this website are being used in articles within splinter groups. It is evidence that this website is been used as inspiration which is quite shocking really. Very well timed comment.

RSK said...

Hes playing with the word "hash" that was unintentionally used, 834a.

Anonymous said...

Gimme a break. I don't know how many times I heard it said, either of HWA, or else of ministers, that the laymember does not have the standing to correct or bring any charges against such a church authority figure. "Only god has the standing to correct them, and he will, in his good time. We must be patient." This is one that I know Dave Pack likes to echo too. All that is, is a declaration of immunity.

If you ever hear anyone defend an authority figure using that argument in any organzation, you know that organization is, or has become, a cult. The republican party comes to mind...

Anonymous said...

A footnote in The New Testament: A Translation by David Bentley Hart (a Greek Orthodox scholar at Notre Dame):

There is little doubt among scholars that the episode of the woman taken in adultery was not written by the same hand that produced the surrounding text. It is not found in the earliest manuscripts of John, or in any Greek or Latin text still extant from before the late fourth century. It is written in a more polished style that the rest of the text, far closer to that of Luke's Gospel than that of John's; and, in fact, in certain Greek and Armenian families of manuscripts the story appears in Luke--where it seems to fit better for a great many reasons--rather than in John. It is also a passage that, in both its Lukan and Johannine exemplars, shifts between different locations in the texts; as placed here in John, it clearly interrupts Jesus's discourse. This does not mean, however, that the episode is some late invention inserted into the text to make Jesus appear more compassionate (not necessarily his most conspicuous characteristic in the fourth Gospel). For one thing, in late antiquity--Jewish, Christian, or pagan--it would have been far more scandalous than commendable in most eyes for Jesus to have allowed an adulteress to go away not only unpunished, but entirely without rebuke. For another, there is good reason to think the episode may in fact be drawn from an older narrative source than the Gospel itself: there is a tale of a very sinful woman that the early second-century Christian Papias mentioned as being part of the lost Gospel of the Hebrews; the Syrian Didascalia (from the third century) cites "the story of the adulteress"; the Constitutions of the Apostles (in a portion probably also from the third century) relates a similar story of a sinful woman whom Jesus refused to condemn; and both Didymus the Blind and Jerome mention the tale as appearing in many manuscripts before the end of the fourth century. Moreover, the earliest texts of John do not merely lack the story; in its place are diacritical marks indicating that something (maybe the same story, maybe something else) has been omitted. Augustine, in fact, aware of the story's absence from many texts of the Gospel, opined that perhaps it had been removed because of the offense it might give to pious souls unable to understand how Christ could excuse such grave a transgression with no more than an exhortation to sin no more. It seems that the story was something of a freely floating tradition, perhaps with very deep roots in Christian memory, one that was not originally firmly associated with any particular Gospel text, but that was inserted in various versions of Luke or John because it was too beautiful and too illuminating of Christ's ministry and person to be left out of the church's lectionary cycle (and hence out of scripture).

Mickey said...

True. Just giving the benefit of doubt. I have some cringe-worthy memories of having said similar things in my brainwashed days.