Friday, October 12, 2018

Not So Fast! I'm Dreaming!


This afternoon, during a nice nap, I had one of those “Church of God” Dreams that most people who grew up or were in the Worldwide Church of God often seem to have.

In this dream, I was led in the back of a large arena – obviously, where there was a convention going on. For some reason, I had the opportunity to have a conference with the Big Person in Charge, who happened to be Joseph Tkach. He was sitting behind a glass window, and I was in a line to talk to him. There were several behind me also waiting to talk to him.

When it was my turn, I asked him if I could return to the Orr, Minnesota SEP site. He began to answer with a rambling of some sort, I dared interrupt him, and his voice raised about two octaves with a “I am talking” in no uncertain terms intent, and I immediately shut up to let him speak. He then proceeded to tell me that the best times of a person's life are when they are 16 or 17. I told him that I was 16 or 17 when I went to SEP. He said something like “There you go”, and gave me a special green/white envelope of “Request to see the SEP Campus” that I had to fill out. I thanked him, and started walking down the hall to exit. As I was walking down the hall, I could hear the distinctive “Tkach Voice – Raised In Annoyance” lam-blasting someone else about something. When I left, someone else tried to get in to talk to Tkach, but the Secretary denied access and closed the camera-thing above the hall access-door.

A few years ago, I had another “COG” dream. In this dream, Herbert W. Armstrong himself – in spirit form – came down to Earth – alone. I was in the basement of what seemed to be a large, giant library. I heard Herbert call my name. I opened the box, and the “Spirit” of Herbert called out to me. Herbert apologized for everything that he did. I asked him why he did what he did, and he very remorsely said “I don't know.” He said he had to go, and I heard what sounded like a bell. I closed the small box that he was trapped in, and then, that was it. The voice was Herbert's, but a very, very mellow, humble, and contrite Herbert. I woke up, and thought “what a dream”.

I've had other “COG Dreams” because the COG was such a large, massive, over-whelming presence in my life over the years. I've had dreams where I'm back leading songs – but somehow screwing it up, or not having the proper hymns coordinated with the piano player, or forgetting I had the song service until the last moment. I've had dreams where I was giving the Sermonnette, but was wearing an awful, pathetic suit. I've had dreams where I felt that immense, consuming, powerful pride that I was in a higher position within the local church – and woke up completely disgusted and shameful about those untamed attitudes.

There's a big difference between the dreams that any one of us hundreds of thousands of people who lived in the COG's have – and the dreams that our current splinter leaders have. It's directly proportional to who we think we are in the grand scope of the universe, the church, and life.

When a typical person with a COG history – like me – has a COG dream, they do exactly what I did. They wake up, say “Wow, what a dream”, think about it, then go about their day. When a Current Splinter Leader has a dream (I'm thinking of one person in particular who needs straighter bookcases and nicer curtains), they think about it in the form that it is of world-impacting significance and importance. They think of themselves in such high regard and importance to the world, that every parcel and fractal of the dream takes on a divine significance – to them, to the other characters in the dream, and eventually, to the world. Their feelings of grandiose importance are so tremendous that they nearly take on their own prophetic ministry and theology based on what went on in the dream.

I recall when our Cheap Bookcase Prophet wrote a pretty lengthy oratory about a dream he had where “someone's line went down”, like a graph, and “his line went up”. Suddenly, this dream about “lines” went from dream to blog post to our Bookcase King of Bad Curtains suddenly using this dream as a divine affirmation that he was to take over the place and position of the owner of the “first line” that was going down on his dreamland bar graph. It went from dream to affirmation, to using the dream as a basis for an elevation in his position! The Might Waver of Gestures then had to tell everyone how this somehow was linked in to his own assumptions about The Mighty Double Blessing That Wasn't – somehow asserting what he thought in his head that a healing-anointing somehow was a hidden and morphed Ordination that elevated him from a simple layperson to a role he's always wanted but never got of an Important Dude in the church.

If I was to use the methodology that he uses with dreams, I could start a whole new belief system. I could say that the Spirit of Herbert Armstrong is trapped in a prison, and that he has become remorseful and contrite, and that I was granted a lone audience with Herbert to convey his apology and remorse for his actions. I could say that Herbert was timed and a bell signaled that “he had to go”. But I recognize it was a dream. I could also say that somehow I was in a parallel universe with Joseph Tkach, where he was now reduced to a receptionist – a rather forceful, assertive, and mean receptionist at that. I could think on that and somehow come to a bunch of conclusions about what that meant for Tkach's ministry, and all sorts of different conclusions – based on a dream. And to me – that would be naive, stupid, and dangerous.

Of course, Bob, and any COG member who ever listened to these stories would never buy their authenticity in a million years, even if they were! Why? Because these dreams contradict the beliefs they have already formed in their head. There's no immortal soul, there's no heaven, there's no conscious spirit, they would forcefully say – so obviously, it's just a complete figment of imagination and needs to be summarily dismissed. However, if you have a weird dream where one bar graph line goes down, and one bar graph line goes up, then, because it seems to affirm an already held strong belief, it's lauded up to some sort of divine affirmation.

This is a methodology that the COG's have down to a science, and a methodology that Kairan Underwood said that the PCG used in writing many of it's own articles for it's own flagship magazine. Look for anything you can find to confirm your beliefs, then throw out everything you can find that dismisses them. Take the smallest rock and elevate it to universal proportions. Or, take the biggest evidence and dismiss it completely because it contradicts already concreted viewpoints.

It was this methodology that Herbert Armstrong used over and over again in his ministry to legitimize his dogmas and doctrines. It was this methodology that Herman Hoeh used to support Herbert Armstrong's dogmas and doctrines. It was this methodology that field ministers used each Saturday while preaching to their congregations on their own belief divergences – within the lines of Armstrong's dogmas and doctrines. All of this led to variances of belief – within the confines of Armstrong's beliefs – which is why one local congregation sometimes varied considerably with another local congregation's experience. Every minister had, within the confines of their rank, that extreme hubris – only tempered by the dictatorial hand of Herbert Armstrong, who forcefully shot down any challenge or rise on his beliefs or his authority.

Once Herbert Armstrong died, once the Church collapsed, and that dictatorial hand of Herbert Armstrong was no longer holding down the hubris, pride, and self-beliefs of field ministers and evangelists under him – the individual dogmas and doctrines held by all the field ministers exploded without temperance. Now, 23 years later from the collapse of the church, we have one of them preaching a horrifying “All things common” doctrine, another one idolizing a simple garden rock, another one claiming to be a minister but never was ordained to the position, another one trying so hard to hold down the fort of his own rapidly crumbling splinter, another one who went to prison for trying too hard to replicate Herbert Armstrong's luxurious lifestyle – and then you have the weird and wacky ones who've only been able to grab a few hundred viewers on YouTube – literally the bottom of the barrel in YouTube Statistics and video viewers.

The methodology of the splinter leaders – Look for anything you can find to confirm your beliefs, throw out everything else that dismisses them, is how the Armstrong Churches of God have operated for decades.

In a recent expose' by a former writer of the PCG's Magazine "The Trumpet", and a true PCG Insider himself published right here on Banned By HWA, Kieran Underwood confirmed himself that this methodology has been used to write several publications by that splinter. But it's not only that splinter. One can easily see the exact personalities and attitudes that each of the COG leaders have. You can tell who is greedy, who is angry, who is physically oriented. You can tell who is jealous, who is wanting, who is child-like, who is wishing they were important, and who wants to bring back the glory days. By using this formula, you can tell very easily what an individual person's COG-Beliefs are – but more than that, you can tell who they are as a person. It is said that "By your fruits shall you know them." Equally true is that by their methods, you can see right through them, I would say.

And if you go by facts alone, the Splinter Leaders themselves have proven themselves to be completely enraptured in jealousy-driven, greed-oriented, physically-minded, money-loving, Herbert-worshiping religion that is not, never has been, and never will ever pass as any form of Christianity. All this is is a sham and a scam, exposing exactly who and what these splinters are – a reflection.

submitted by SHT

35 comments:

Anonymous said...

Scarecrows & magic and other fatal fears do not bring people closer together. There is no substitute for soft caring and hard work, for self-respect and mutual love.

"1-EX- sheeple" said...

And there's that old saying...don't confuse me with the facts-my mind is already made up.
too bad this mind set is so prevalent in so many yet today. And as J P Barnam said there's a
sucker born every minute...problem is of will full ignorance...not just mere ignorance per se.

Anonymous said...

I remember a sermon given by the local minister in the old wcg...oh...probably somewhere in the '80's, about the fruits of the spirit. The thing about that sermon was that he gave it without understanding the spiritual intent. He made them into commands: we must love (with a series on the different kinds of love, rights and wrongs of love, etc.), we are commanded to be joyful, we have to be kind OR ELSE! To hold to the beliefs of armstrong, the scriptures were changed, some ignored, guilt added...etc, etc. Of course by ignoring the first coming of Jesus, why He died, was resurrected and imparted his Holy Spirit into those who belive, thus ENABLING us to live the fruits produced in us by The Holy Spirit, he changed it into a "you do this or it's the lake of fire for you" kind of thing. That was his way of dealing with scriptures he refused to understand. His goal did not include salvation in Jesus the Christ. His only goal was to control our minds to give as much money as he could get us to give. He was an expert liar, manipulator, extortioner, and abuser (in every sense of the word). Money, fame, fortune and idols were his goal. He got what he wanted. He couldn't take ANY of it with him to the grave. Oh wait, yes he did. He took with him to the grave the adoration of those who still worship him. And those who still worship him are still trying to ruin lives in his (Herbert Armstrong's) name. Still the same old bullchips over and over and over again. Thanks to this site and those who contribute the truth to uncover what REALLY took place and is still taking place, maybe some of these hwa followers will wise up and cometo know the one and only TRUE God and gospel.

Allen Dexter said...

What a coincidence! I had a crazy dream last night too. I was starting a secular "church" of some kind. This nonsense brought it back to mind. Nope. Ain't gonna take it as some kind of supernatural instruction. Might have been something I ate last night that caused it.

Anonymous said...

At least most of you guys had tame dreams about the church. Me? I had PTSD dreams about being raised under the child beating booklet and about the Germans. Thank God those subsided and faded with time.

DennisCDiehl said...

"You MUST love...." "You MUST rejoice..." etc is like "You MUST relax" The MUST puts a certain pressure on the "relax" which results in stress. However, in the COG's that which should flow naturally from the experience has to be commanded or it isn't even going to appear to exist in reality. In hindsight, I was never really happy or content. Being a member, much less Pastoring, was always one damn thing after the next. I pretended to be everything from inspired to excited about "the Work." I found that just under the surface I just wanted to be left alone but that wasn't going to happen in that environment.

I think it's why I thought "Is there a proper blessing for the Czar" in Fiddler on the Roof was so hilarious to me. "A proper blessing for the Czar? (asked of the Rabbi) Yes! May God bless and keep the Czar....far away from us!"

Anonymous said...

I recently learnt from the Painful Truth blog that a former minister of mine died in his mid sixties. Which is young by today's standard. Considering how and abusive and slanderous he was, he couldn't have qualified for eternal life.
The worlds a dangerous place.

Kevin McMillen said...

"""Thanks to this site and those who contribute the truth to uncover what REALLY took place and is still taking place, maybe some of these hwa followers will wise up and cometo know the one and only TRUE God and gospel.

October 12, 2018 at 10:51 PM"""Nah

----------------------------------

If you've read any of my posts you'll know that I'm not a herbie fan, nor a wcg or any other splinter fan, but I'm just wondering who and what you've determined to be the "only TRUE God and gospel"?

Though I disagree with herbie's methods I still believe that the basics of what wcg taught as the salvation plan of God makes the most sense compared to any other christian denomination.

If I came to the conclusion that the plan of salvation as taught by the wcg was a lie I would never be able to join "orthodox evangelical christianity". I would have to do what Dennis has done, throw it all out. Why? Because mainstream x-ianity makes no sense.

They teach a God who knows all. A God who knew before he created anything who would choose hell or who would choose him, and created the ones who choose hell anyway. Condemning them to eternal life in torment.

If God knows all, of the thousands of eggs in each woman, and the thousands of sperm in each man, wouldn't he be able to find a combination that would accept him?

Why did the orthodox God wait 4,000 years before sending Jesus? How many billions lived prior to Jesus never knowing about him? Can they be saved without him? Not according to the bible.

Anyone who has quit the WCG, knowing what was taught about God's plan of salvation for ALL of mankind, and then going "mainstream" to worship a monster God like that, is beyond me.

I completely understand the disdain for herbie, for herbies Nazi styled clergy class, and herbies church, I disdain it all too but anyone with an IQ over 100 should be able to see the monster that evangelical x-ianity teaches.

They take Rom. 8 - 10 completely out of context to justify a God who creates some for honor and some for dishonor/destruction. Not temporarily as the WCG taught, but eternal destruction. That is a monster. How could anyone in good conscience worship that?

If I didn't believe in a God who is working out a plan to save all who don't knowingly, willfully refuse, each in their own time, I guarantee I'd be the most vocal athiest out there!

Take this as bragging if you want, I don't care, but an IQ in the top 99% of the bell curve won't allow me to worship the god that mainstream christianity teaches. He's, as I said, a monster!!!!

The late Ronald L. Dart has the best book that I know of explaining what God is really doing down here. Please read it from cover to cover. It's titled - The Thread, God's Appointments With History, and it can be bought used on Amazon or read online here:

http://www.protorah.com/the-thread-by-ronald-l-dart/


The only thing that I personally would caution anyone, don't ever join a church organization or denomination. Fellowship anywhere that you are welcome but never, ever join!

Kevin McMillen

Connie Schmidt said...

Kevin McMillen is correct. Dont ever "join" anything. This includes all manner of associations, clubs and organizations. What happens is a form of "harvesting" and "homogenizing of the spirit".

All organizations , even small ones, will have a dominant, and everyone else will be expected to conform to the leader's "standards".

Sad, but the world is composed of "prostitutes and johns", "wolves and sheep" , "zombies and vampires" all in a constant dance of harvesting and submitting for validation.

True leadership of ones self is a very lonely journey. Expect it to be so. Should one find the loneliness a bit too much, and find the necessity to socialize in a church or wherever, always be aware of the pull of conformity, and maintain spiritual and psychological distance at all costs. That does not mean you cannot love or have relationships. Unfortunately, groups will discern that you are "aware" of the game, and will marginalize you and keep you held away, should you be able to see through the menagerie.

Kevin McMillen said...

Only thing that I have to say Connie is, hear, hear!!!!!!!

Kevin

Anonymous said...

Kevin of 6:27
You asked me what is the real truth and the real gospel.
Well, first let me clarify that I do not attend any church, mainstream or otherwise. Having said that, I believe that the real truth is Jesus Christ and God is Love. The Gospel, to me, is the promise of receiving the Holy Spirit, which was made possible after Jesus' resurrection, to everyone who asks and believes. The new commandments of love God (we love God because He first loved us) and love humans from the love He gives us by and through His Holy Spirit. THAT is the gospel. His indwelling. A one on one relationship made possible by Jesus Christ. The fruits of that Spirit are produced, not by us, but by the Holy Spirit dwelling in us.
It has nothing to do with the laws of Moses, which have been "finished" when Jesus died. It has nothing to do with prophecy. It has everything to do with a heart and mind relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. When you read the new covenant from Acts on with this spiritual understanding in mind, the Bible takes on a whole new meaning.
I've answered your question to the best of my ability. I am not a scholar, a church member, or anything. I'm just a lowly commoner who has witnessed and experienced many miracles (yes, they still occur) in my life and others, and I have a personal relationship with my Creator. Jesus made that possible.
The fruits from such a relationship are spiritual and real. That's all.

Allen Dexter said...

Connie, I agree with you for the most part. I helped start a free thinkers group here in Sedona and the Verde Valley. A couple dominant leaders pretty much control it now, not maliciously or corruptly, but every group has to have some one or some few dominant individuals to remain a cohesive unit. Dues are not enforced. You can attend and pay nothing, but that does not appeal to us and some of the events they sponsor seem pointless to us. Besides that, on our limited income, we have to watch the gas we have to buy to attend anything, so we've pretty much backed away. If we can't be all in, there doesn't seem to be a point anymore.

Kevin McMillen said...

"""Anonymous said...
Kevin of 6:27
You asked me what is the real truth and the real gospel.
Well, first let me clarify that I do not attend any church, mainstream or otherwise. Having said that, I believe that the real truth is Jesus Christ and God is Love. The Gospel, to me, is the promise of receiving the Holy Spirit, which was made possible after Jesus' resurrection, to everyone who asks and believes. The new commandments of love God (we love God because He first loved us) and love humans from the love He gives us by and through His Holy Spirit. THAT is the gospel. His indwelling. A one on one relationship made possible by Jesus Christ. The fruits of that Spirit are produced, not by us, but by the Holy Spirit dwelling in us.
It has nothing to do with the laws of Moses, which have been "finished" when Jesus died. It has nothing to do with prophecy. It has everything to do with a heart and mind relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. When you read the new covenant from Acts on with this spiritual understanding in mind, the Bible takes on a whole new meaning.
I've answered your question to the best of my ability. I am not a scholar, a church member, or anything. I'm just a lowly commoner who has witnessed and experienced many miracles (yes, they still occur) in my life and others, and I have a personal relationship with my Creator. Jesus made that possible.
The fruits from such a relationship are spiritual and real. That's all.

October 13, 2018 at 10:22 AM"""

-----------------------

Thank you for your answer.

Kevin

Anonymous said...

It's my experience that the long term benefit of being a member of any group is zero. Short term, one can benefit, but not long term. The Pharisees and Saducees rejecting Christ is an excellent example. Group disciple and conformity kept members in line, even though some knew that the group was wrong. Groups always demand their pound of flesh.

Fellowshipping but not joining? I question whether that's possible or even moral. There's unspoken terms and conditions. There's expectations. You're playing games with that group, and things can get ugly if the group puts its foot down.

Anonymous said...

I think the perfect Christian gathering (do not forsake the gathering of yourselves together...) would be a group of people, or even two or three getting together over a meal and discussing the positives of their Christian living...testimonials of Divine intervention, praising God together in song and, if they want to, to pray for each other and others, the world, whatever. No one person being "in charge", no demands or "musts" (as Dennis put it), no money at all involved. Maybe some scriptures might be brought up for other's take on it. And then departure on a happy and joyful note
Today, everybody tries to be Jesus, preaching to the crowds...but Jesus was teaching spiritual truths about the transition from the law of Moses to the 2 laws of God...from physical to spiritual. The pharisees hated him for who he, in their minds, claimed to be, and ended killing an innocent man, who sacrificed himself for us. Corporate Christianity, to me, is not Christianity. It's a business, to take in money and build bigger and finer buildings. Don't get me wrong. There ARE people who are true Christians. Most of them are known as good people who quietly help people, will "give the shirt off their backs", will be led (by the Holy Spirit) to visit the sick or those in prison, or have strangers over for dinner. You know them by their fruits, their examples of living those fruits. Those people are "the church" and they might not even know each other. They make up the body of Christ. In some cases...ok, most cases...only God knows who they are.

Kevin McMillen said...

"""Anonymous said...

Fellowshipping but not joining? I question whether that's possible or even moral. There's unspoken terms and conditions. There's expectations. You're playing games with that group, and things can get ugly if the group puts its foot down.

October 13, 2018 at 12:31 PM"""

---------------------------------------

Been doing that for over 23 years. I don't keep it a secret that I won't join either.

I've been told by two groups that I'm no longer welcome. That's fine by me.

I told the hirelings when told I wasn't welcome that if I wanted to attend I would, that he couldn't stop me. That he could call the police and I would call the local newspaper.

Of course, being a Christian I never went because the sheeple are so blind I would be seen as the bad guy instead of the hireling.

Kevin

Yes and No to HWA said...

In regards to “The Thread,” which I have a copy along with Ron’s “The Lonely God” and “Law and Covenant,” it would have been nice to have include the revision of the Holy days in the Ezekielian Torah for the Millennium.

This could have included the change in the nature of the Passover from apotropaic to purgative with a public sacrifice of a bull as purification offering;

Also the change in the cleansing of the Temple from the seventh month to the first month; which would include the necessity of animal sacrifices for atonement. Compare also the heightened requirements of priestly purification after corpse-contact.

A couple of other points where I would disagree with the book:

Christ and the Saints will not be on the earth during the Millennium - I disagree with the assumption that if you are going to reign on the earth you will be on the earth; and

the Crucifixion was not on a Wednesday and other erroneous explanations of Scripture that support this position.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath [sabbaton - gen pl neut] day to keep it holy. (LXX).

For example of the latter, there were not two Sabbaths in the week Christ died. An appeal is made to Matt 28:1. It was the convention of the time to use the singular and plural interchangeably for the ‘Sabbath’ - the seventh day:

(In the OT, the first and last days of Unleavened Bread along with Penrtecost are never called shabbats, not even shabbatons - this convention is carried on in the NT - the first day of Unleavened Bread was on the Sabbath, according to John’s calendar, when Christ died in AD 30).

Mt 12:1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath [sabbasin - dat pl neut] day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungered, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.

Mt 12:2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath [sabbato - dat sq neut] day.

(Herman Hoeh, in “The Crucifixion was not on a Friday” accused scholars of not knowing that the first sabbath [sabbaton - gen pl neut - see LXX above] of Mt 28:1 was in the plural; they did know it was, hence their translation, and it appears it was Herman Hoeh who did not know the convention as revealed by his wrong interpretation).

Having said the above I have always enjoyed listen to and reading Ron Dart, even though I may disagree with him on some points.

Kevin McMillen said...

"""For example of the latter, there were not two Sabbaths in the week Christ died. An appeal is made to Matt 28:1. It was the convention of the time to use the singular and plural interchangeably for the ‘Sabbath’ - the seventh day:"""

----------------------

What evidence do you have of this?

Luk 23:56 - And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

So, you think that the women were able to view the tomb where Jesus was laid, return and then prepare the spices all before sunset on what we call Friday?

The phrase mia ton sabbaton is a hebraism as I'm sure that you know. Forcing Greek grammer on a hebraism by adding the word day is imo disingenuous.

The kicker for me, that proves a Wednesday crucifixion imo, is the road to Emmaus. The Greek is mistranslated. It doesn't say "today is the third day since" the Greek says "the third day leads today".

Just as a train engine leads a train, when the caboose appears the engine has passed, so too the third day lead the day they were walking to Emmaus. On that day the third day had already passed.

There are a couple translations that have this correct. They say, "the third day has passed".

You can read more here:

www.a4t.org/Sermons/Brown/11-ennaus.pdf


As far as the Saints being in heaven, I completely agree with you.

Kevin

Anonymous said...

Yes and No to HWA 6:51 PM said:

A couple of other points where I would disagree with the book: Christ and the Saints will not be on the earth during the Millennium - I disagree with the assumption that if you are going to reign on the earth you will be on the earth; and the Crucifixion was not on a Wednesday and other erroneous explanations of Scripture that support this position.

Regarding the Armstrongist doctrine of a Wednesday crucifixion and Saturday resurrection I no longer subscribe to this position either so I’m glad to see someone else bring it up especially since I downloaded the book last night, but as I started browsing it I noted the chapter promoting Armstrong’s 72 hour theory of the duration of Christ’s entombment and winced a little. I’ll put it on my to-read list as I’m currently reading Joe Taylor’s Giants Against Evolution atm. Suffice to say I recall the first time I shared with the family I independently fellowship with about my new understanding about the “three days and three nights” and that I now believe Christ probably died on Friday (Passover) and rose not 72 hours later, but on the third day itself (Wavesheaf Sunday) and the husband would self-righteously assert for months afterwards each time they’d have other guests fellowshiping with us in my presence, “Idk how some Christians believe Christ died on Friday and rose on Sunday when you can’t fit ‘three days and three nights’ in between such!” I would feel at such times he was making a dig at me, but I would refuse to take the bait and respectfully remained silent until the subject matter changed. I appreciate the McLuhan saying more now though having experienced it for myself as I grow in understanding: “I wouldn’t have seen it if I hadn’t believed it!” Since where they’re at currently I once was too and where I am at currently they’ll be too. The timing is up to the Lord who corrects each of us in His time and by a means of His own choosing.

Yes and No to HWA said...

Kevin asks:

“What evidence do you have of this?”.

The example in my post - Matthew 12:1-2.

Luke’s parallel:

Lk 6:1 One Sabbath [sabbato - dat sq neut] Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels. (NIV).

Lk 6:2 Some of the Pharisees asked, "Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath [sabbasin - dat pl neut] ?" (NIV).

Kevin writes:

“Forcing Greek grammer on a hebraism by adding the word day is imo disingenuous.”

If you look at the AV “day” is in italics. It is added to give the sense. But grammarians also note “the fact that the numeral is feminine indicates that the feminine noun "day" is to be understood.”

Ps 23:1 A Psalm for David on the first day of the week [sabbaton - gen pl neut] The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof; the world, and all that dwell in it. (LXX).

First of Sabbaths [sabbaton - gen pl neut] (Mt 28:1) is literal, but may be understood as first of [the] Sabbath which is Sunday, the first day of the week.

Psalm 47 (Septuagint) has as its title deutera sabbatou [gen singular neut], "for the second day of the week."

Kevin writes:

“The kicker for me, that proves a Wednesday crucifixion imo, is the road to Emmaus.”

For me it is a kicker for a Friday crucifixion. I read the link, but I disagree with Jerry’s argument especially his modern-western reasoning.

Ac 10:30 And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing,

"The time has come for Cornelius to explain why he summoned Peter to his house. In a few sentences he relates the incident that happened "four days ago at this hour." Strictly speaking, the time between Cornelius' vision and the moment he addresses Peter is only three days. But in first-century Palestine, the people regarded part of a day as a full day. Hence the day of Cornelius vision is the first day [at three in the afternoon]. Peter's vision and the arrival of the messengers from Joppa, the second; the day the travellers left Joppa, the third; the day they arrived in Caesarea, the fourth" (Simon J. Kistemaker, Acts, NTC, p.389).

1Sa 30:12 And they gave him a piece of a cake of figs, and two clusters of raisins: and when he had eaten, his spirit came again to him: for he had eaten no bread, nor drunk any water, three days and three nights.
1Sa 30:13 And David said unto him, To whom belongest thou? and whence art thou? And he said, I am a young man of Egypt, servant to an Amalekite; and my master left me, because three days agone I fell sick.

A poor analogy is “I will be there in a minute”. A minute is sixty seconds. So the timeframe maybe a literal minute but overwhelming it is not. So three days and three nights may also be a literal 72 hours but it is not used that way in the Bible. Three nights and three days, if it was so, would appear to be a better way to describe it.

Passover pictures Christ’s sacrifice, the wave sheaf His resurrection - just as the physical harvest begins after the Sabbat so did the spiritual harvest.

For an amateur argument that deals with these issues and more see http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/id114.htm - needs some work.

Kevin McMillen said...

"""Yes and No to HWA said...
Kevin asks:

“What evidence do you have of this?”.

The example in my post - Matthew 12:1-2.

Luke’s parallel:

Lk 6:1 One Sabbath [sabbato - dat sq neut] Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels. (NIV).

Lk 6:2 Some of the Pharisees asked, "Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath [sabbasin - dat pl neut] ?" (NIV)."""

------------------------


Luke 6:1 actually says on the second Sabbath after the first. This has confused many people, but when you understand the seven Sabbath count to Pentecost there is no problem. It was the second week/sabbath in the seven week/sabbaths count.

The reason for the singular and plural Sabbath is because the Sabbath is a day, and it's also a period of time. We call that period of time a week. For us a week can be from Tuesday to
Tuesday, Friday to Friday, but a Sabbaton is always from Sabbath to Sabbath.

Technically mia ton sabbaton, first the sabbaths, isn't a day, it's the first week count to Pentecost.

As in Acts 20:7, most assume the breaking of bread was on Sunday but mia ton sabbaton merely means the first Sabbath, not the singular day but the first week from Sabbath to Sabbath. So the breaking of bread could have occurred on any day during that first week/sabbaton count to Pentecost.

1 Cor. 16:2 same thing. Everyone assumes that Paul is telling them to bring the collection on Sunday. Not so. The harvest began on wave sheaf Sunday and Paul told them that on the first (of seven) week/sabbaton of harvesting to lay up a collection for Judea.

They had the whole first week/sabbaton of harvest to set aside a collection for Judea, not just one day.

Now to the Greek grammer. Yes I know that the word day is added because greek grammer requires a feminine noun to go with mia. That's why I said greek grammer shouldn't be forced on a hebraism. Sabbaton is a hebrew word brought into Greek, a hebraism.

If I'm speaking English and use the Spanish for house casa, do I have to say "she" house just because casa is feminine?

Mia ton sabbaton is talking about the first week (from sabbath to sabbath) in the seven week harvest, it is not a day, it is a period of seven days.

One other thing about crucifixion week. I'm sure that you dismiss Daniel 9:27 about the midst of the week as proof of Wednesday. Ok, fine.

But why did God wait almost four thousand years to send Jesus?

Four thousand years, Jesus came and died, two thousand years, Jesus returns, one thousand year millennium.

Many will pooh-pooh this seven thousand year scenario but it sure seems correct. If it is, then God waiting until the end of the fourth millennia, the fourth "day" to send Jesus to die. Well, coincidence?

How about Jesus' first Feast of Tabernacles during his three and a half year ministry? His brothers told him to go up to the Feast, he said his time hadn't come yet.

Then in the midst of the feast he went to the Temple. The fourth day of the Feast is the midst of the feast.

Four days, four thousand years. Wednesday being the fourth day of the week?

Deny all that you want, it doesn't matter to me. Too much coincidence for me.I

Kevin

Kevin McMillen said...


"""
Anonymous said...
Yes and No to HWA 6:51 PM said:

A couple of other points where I would disagree with the book: Christ and the Saints will not be on the earth during the Millennium - I disagree with the assumption that if you are going to reign on the earth you will be on the earth; and the Crucifixion was not on a Wednesday and other erroneous explanations of Scripture that support this position.

Regarding the Armstrongist doctrine of a Wednesday crucifixion and Saturday resurrection I no longer subscribe to this position either
October 13, 2018 at 10:13 PM"""

---------------------------------------

Oh brother! I can understand hating everything Armstrong, but what I don't understand is the ignorance displayed by many who hate him.

The Wednesday crucifixion idea didn't originate with herbie, nothing originated with herbie.



http://www.giveshare.org/HolyDay/satreshistory.html


Kevin



Kevin McMillen said...

"""For me it is a kicker for a Friday crucifixion. I read the link, but I disagree with Jerry’s argument especially his modern-western reasoning."""

-------------------------

So, the actual Greek saying "the third day leads today" means nothing to you?

I think your mind is made up and nothing will change it.

It does not say "today is the third day"!!!!

Good day,

Kevin

Anonymous said...

Kevin 8:46 AM said:
Oh brother! I can understand hating everything Armstrong, but what I don't understand is the ignorance displayed by many who hate him.
The Wednesday crucifixion idea didn't originate with herbie, nothing originated with herbie.
http://www.giveshare.org/HolyDay/satreshistory.html


I used “Armstrongist” in reference to the doctrine heavily promoted by him, i.e. the Wednesday crucifixion-Saturday resurrection, not because I’m ignorant about the origins of the doctrine, but because it’s a distinctive doctrine of Herbert Armstrong, which I believe the majority of the organizations originating from his ministry steadfastly observe having learned it of him.

Thanks for the Giving & Sharing link. I Ioved the late Richard Nickels’s “Bible Study” newsletters back in the 1990s and other publications of his. He was an honest researcher whose opinions and conclusions I respected.

The publication by George Dellinger I’m aware of and have a PDF copy, but don’t know where I acquired it off the internet otherwise I’d post a link. I’ve shared it with a friend of mine who adheres to this doctrine. To me, Dellinger demonstrates it’s a recent doctrine that doesn’t go further back than a couple of centuries whereas the history and tradition for a Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection is far more overwhelming in my opinion, going all the way back to the first centuries of the Christian church.

I’ve been compiling a study myself on the subject for several years that
I intended to share online, but due to my poor health I haven’t been able to continue or complete it to my satisfaction. In any event, there’s several online sites that evaluate, and in my opinion satisfactorily undermine and disprove, the theory.

As Bereans Did

Was Jesus crucified on Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday?

What Day Did Jesus Die?

Wednesday Crucifixion Theory

Yes and No to HWA said...

Kevin,

Hopefully we can agree to disagree on some interpretations. I respect you understanding - I don’t consider you have a closed mind because you disagree with me; but you could be right that I have a closed mind.

In regards to Luke 6:1 “sabbath the second first/chief,” it may refer to the count to Pentecost, but there are other proposals; I don’t know what it means.

I disagree that mia ton sabbaton does not refer to a day; for me it refers to the first day of the week.

I disagree with Jerry’s argument and a Wednesday crucifixion.

I also don’t hate HWA; which I hoped my non de plume, Yes and No to HWA, would suggest.

I never said that the HWA came up with the Wednesday crucifixion.

One more thing:

Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Da 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

I don’t see where in the above verses that Christ was killed/cut off in the middle of a week. Yes, Christ was and the Antichrist will be killed in the middle of a prophetic week (7 years) but these verses do not reveal it.

The “he,” of verse 27, is the prince of the people, the nearest antecedent. In the middle of the prophetic week he will bring the sacrifices to an end, until they are restarted in Ezekiel’s temple, and be responsible for the desolations of the last half of the prophetic week. Well, this is the way I see it.

Kevin McMillen said...

"""I’ve been compiling a study myself on the subject for several years that
I intended to share online, but due to my poor health I haven’t been able to continue or complete it to my satisfaction. In any event, there’s several online sites that evaluate, and in my opinion satisfactorily undermine and disprove, the theory."""

------------------------------

I hope your health improves, thanks for the links I will read them.

Kevin

Kevin McMillen said...

"""Anonymous Yes and No to HWA said...
Kevin,

Hopefully we can agree to disagree on some interpretations. I respect you understanding - I don’t consider you have a closed mind because you disagree with me; but you could be right that I have a closed mind.

In regards to Luke 6:1 “sabbath the second first/chief,” it may refer to the count to Pentecost, but there are other proposals; I don’t know what it means."""

----------------------------------------------

Sure we can agree to disagree. About my "closed mind" comment, it wasn't an accusation. It's just that I assume the web page that you posted at, futurewatch was your work, and I've found that most people who put that much work into something are not likely to be convinced they're wrong.

Scholars tell us that mia ton sabbaton refers to the first day of the week, why? Because we know the women went to the tomb after the sabbath and the day after the sabbath is the first day of the week, so that proves it, right?

Well no, not necessarily.

The day after that particular sabbath was wave sheaf day, it began the seven sabbaths count to Pentecost.

So the women went to the tomb after the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first of the sabbaths. Or the beginning of the first of the weeks counting to Pentecost.

As I said, sure we can agree to disagree, I used to think mia ton sabbaton was a name solely for the wave sheaf day, but I now think it can refer to any time during that first week count to Pentecost.

The phrase is used in literature after the bible to refer to Sunday, but I haven't seen anything to prove that prior to Jesus' death that was also the case.

You can't use literature written 100 years later to define a word, unless you really want to deck the halls while donning "gay" apparel.


Kevin

Kevin McMillen said...

"""I also don’t hate HWA; which I hoped my non de plume, Yes and No to HWA, would suggest.

I never said that the HWA came up with the Wednesday crucifixion."""

---------------------

Sorry, I know you didn't. It was the way that I copied anonymous' post when he was writing to you. I should have removed your name.

Sorry.

Kevin

Kevin McMillen said...

"""The “he,” of verse 27, is the prince of the people, the nearest antecedent. In the middle of the prophetic week he will bring the sacrifices to an end, until they are restarted in Ezekiel’s temple, and be responsible for the desolations of the last half of the prophetic week. Well, this is the way I see it."""

-------------------------------------

I see the "he" referring to both, a dual prophecy. We'll find out one day.☺


Kevin

Yes and No to HWA said...

Kevin writes:

“I see the "he" referring to both, a dual prophecy.”

At the risk that I may regret asking ☺, would you like to elaborate on the dual prophecy?

I see the seventy weeks prophecy as a type-antitype telescopic prophecy involving Christ and the Antichrist.

Here is my chart on the prophecy: http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/2dbed030.png

Do you see the wars waged in the antichrist’s second half years as a type of the holy wars waged by Christ through Israel in Christ’s second half week? Cp. Zech 9:13, Ps 149:6-9.

Anonymous said...

Kevin
If a church group tells you that you are no longer welcome, you should respect that. Their property rights give them the legal right to exclude you from their property. And their right to freedom of association (to choose their friends) also gives them the right to kick you out of their group.
As far as I'm concerned, you are violating the informal contract that people enter when joining these groups. You're cheating. My pride wouldn't allow me do what you're doing.

Yes and No to HWA said...

The url to my last post on the Seventy Weeks prophecy should have been:

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/2defcce0.png

Hope this works.

Kevin McMillen said...

"""Anonymous said...
Kevin
If a church group tells you that you are no longer welcome, you should respect that. Their property rights give them the legal right to exclude you from their property. And their right to freedom of association (to choose their friends) also gives them the right to kick you out of their group.
As far as I'm concerned, you are violating the informal contract that people enter when joining these groups. You're cheating. My pride wouldn't allow me do what you're doing.

October 16, 2018 at 9:34 AM"""

===============================================

That's where you have the problem, it wasn't the church group, it was the hireling in charge.

Also, did you not see where I said that I never went back?

You sound like a hireling yourself. Running the church of God like a business.

As far as I'm concerned you're a..............

Kevin McMillen

Kevin McMillen said...

"""At the risk that I may regret asking ☺, would you like to elaborate on the dual prophecy?"""

================================

If you believe in a seven thousand year plan, then Jesus did indeed get cut off in the midst of the week. The fourth day of the prophetic week. He also made an end of the old Mt. Sinai covenant.

What I find interesting is that most would agree that Jesus died at the end of the 4th millennia, with 2,000 years til the millennium. That's seven thousand years.

Now if Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday, then the Sabbath before would have been the 10 day of the 1st month when they picked the lamb. If that pictures a time before creation, then that symbolizes Jesus, the lamb slain before the foundation of the world.

Now we have the next week picturing the seven thousand years. Jesus dying on the 14th, a Wednesday, at the end of the day, just as he came to the earth at the end of the four thousand years.

He's in the grave for the rest of the symbolic week and rises most likely around sunset at the end of the Sabbath the beginning of the next dsy. The next day picturing the completion of the plan and on into eternity.

My wife wants me so I don't have time to proof read, hope it makes sense.

Kevin

Kevin McMillen said...

Anonymous 9:34am

I have the legal right to call the newspaper and tell them why this church, in their town, won't let me attend.

In this case it was because the hireling kicked a friend of mine out and he didn't have a good biblical reason to do it so I challenged him on it.

You hirelings don't like it when someone has the balls to question you!

Kevin