For over 70 years, in the zealous mindset of the Churches of God, when it comes to prophecy, they have been trying to fit their predictions into reality like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. They have never even come close to even beginning to have a handle on any kind of accurate prophecy in any of their major predictive theories. Not even once.
Which is honestly saying a lot, because their entire theological foundation hinges only on their predictions of prophecy being correct. Their claim to fame is that they, and only they, have the keys to the Kingdom of God, and that through their understanding of their identity as "spiritual Israelites", then suddenly everything was supposed to have fallen into place. This is the very thing that all ex-members, living or dead, of the Church banked their lives on - that the Church had a mystery long solved, evidenced by their correct interpretations of prophetic understanding.
From their claim that a large part of the Bible is nothing but prophecy, to their literal interpretations of Revelation to the claim of theological duality in prophecy - their claims were the biggest part of their legacy that made the "glory years" what they were. It were these predictions that filled arenas and auditoriums with those who believed what they interpreted prophecy to mean. Who can forget their colorful images of Daniel, of Beasts - of Revelation images with the voice of Art Gilmore over brass instruments echoing their prophetic interpretations? The biggest gamble of any Church of God member's lives was the gamble that the Church knew what they were talking about. The only problem? Enough time has passed that any logically thinking person can know with full certainly that every thing they ever said about prophecy has turned out to be absolutely, categorically, and blatantly false. Their prophetic interpretations cannot be defended, and any belief in their prophetic interpretations today can only be attributed to an acceptance of lies and an inability to renounce what must be renounced, if truth is the yardstick one measures by.
Chronological timeframes have been wrong. Predictions about people have been wrong. Predictions about world events have been wrong. Predictions about world leaders have been wrong. Every one - but that has not stopped certain zealots who believe they alone have the correct interpretation of prophecy from trying. Whether it's Bob, Dave, Ron, James, Gerald, Gerald, or Tom, Dick and Harry - without fail, their timelines end up being fantasies based on delusions of correctness. Truthfully, a five year old who claims to understand how algebra and calculus works can be trusted more than a Church of God minister who claims to know how prophecy and the Bible works. Plus, a five year old can be trusted more than any Church of God minister can. At least a five year old has the intelligence to be corrected when told he's wrong and listen to people who know more than he does.
If their entire construct of their entire religion - and we're talking about Armstrongism - is wrong, then how can one put any credit in anything that they talk about? Partly because of one simple comparison that every one of them makes - them vs. what they see "in the world". What the Armstrong Apologist sees in the world of Corporate Christianity to them is far worse then the failures of Armstrongism. They see what they view as idolatrous worship of false images, pagan holidays and symbols, sun worship, belief in lies such as Santa and the Easter Bunny, embracing of Jeremiah-like Christmas trees, and the rejection of Old Testament commandments they feel are in force. This is what they use to justify that they are "more correct" than "the world", even though in reality they are just as wrong, just in a different tangent. What they do not admit they are doing, however, is measuring everything in the mind of physical legalism, not in the mind of spiritual atonement and reconciliation with God in a pure heart in mind - which they think is impossible spiritually as they judge them physically based on what they think is unacceptable in the eyes of God.
Regardless of your opinion about the physical aspects of more mainstream Christianity, or however disgusted you are with some of the traditions and observances of the same, it does not change the fact that the Churches of God have been sharply condemning of others while dismissive of their own heretical problems. There can be no sugar coating it - lies, deceptions, delusions, and failed prophecies have been as big a problem with the Churches of God as they ever could be. And no amount of shifting blame to the problems of Mainstream Corporate Christianity as they see them will ever make that statement untrue. Untold harm and psychological damage has been the result of the lies and failures of the Churches of God's prediction addiction from people of all ages - from children to senior citizens, and all those who have ever listened to the lies of Herbert Armstrong and every splinter leader, from Dave to Bob to James, who in their self-righteous arrogance dares think they speak for God when the record is clear they only speak from their own minds, without one shred of credibility or reason to believe they could be right. Ronald Weinland himself has cemented the reality of what happens when one banks on Armstrong predictions for the record of Armstrongism for generations to come.
There is one thing about prophecy that we can know for sure is true in the Churches of God when it comes to the "sure word". That the only sure word of "prophecy" in the Churches of God is "False".
53 comments:
One thing HWA was right was his prediction that his empire would be raft with splits and politics after his demise.
Of course, that was a self evident prediction, as his organization was full of splits, politcs and division even before his death.
Their critique of the other Christian churches (if indeed Armstrongism can be classified as a Christian religion) is based on a lack of in depth familiarity with them. HWA started a “seeker church”. He sought out people who, for the most part, were not strongly rooted in their original church, or were unchurched prior to their R/WCG experience. Some had gone through catastrophes in their lives, had chronic or crippling illnesses, were a bit off mentally, in need of strong structure or a leader to follow, etc. There had been a family catastrophe in the case of my parents, and of course my siblings and I got dragged from a relatively pleasant strong-normal life into a hellish existence, tainting our perceptions of God in the process. Our loving and nurturing extended family had to be shunned because they were “not being called” at this time. We were no longer even allowed to pray for them.
I have encountered a handful of people over the years who came into the church because they felt that HWA had the truth about the sabbath, but in most cases, fear of the coming tribulation was the main gateway.
It was a “save your ass” church whose false teachings nearly annihilated our asses instead.
BB
Just have any of the ministers, prophets, two witnesses tell us what specific prophecy they have gotten right, name, place and date. They are all past their allotted six thousands years of mankind's rule. If Mr. Flurry knows were religious objects are buried, start digging them out right now. Do not worry what man will do to your archaeological expedition, Mr. Flurry, you can call fire down. Oh, wait you are a fraud.
SHT-Good breakdown of how the various COGs see their mission. I left the WCOG almost 25/years ago. Nothing has changed. Well one thing has changed, the people are older. Every week the same groups meet to hear the same sermons week after week. Ron Weinland prophesied Christ (Jesus) would return today. Hmmm guess he was wrong again. Will he admit he was wrong, no he will spin it and come up with another excuse. Did Herbert ever admit he was wrong? No!! I don’t know how Don Ward could say they have the “sure word of prophecy” with a straight face. They could save a lot of money by selecting 12 sermon tapes from the 60’s. Some from Rod Meredith, some from Dean Blackwell, some from Gerald Waterhouse, and some from Raymond McNair. Cycle them repeadly. They are just as appropriate today as they were 50:years ago. They could then recycle a sermon from Dick Ames on, the revival of the Roman Empire, he could explain how the pope is the scarlet woman and will ride the beast. That would bring them (any of the acogs) to a sure word of prophecy.
Jim-AZ
The only "sure words of prophecy" that have ever been uttered are the ones that "prophesy" events that have already taken place, such as the "prophecy" in the gospels inserted into the mouth of the Jesus character about the temple being destroyed, written after the temple was temple was destroyed. When the gospel writers had him prophesy the coming of the "son of man," which hadn't happened yet, that failed totally.
Prophetic error doesn't prove that other doctrines are wrong.
The essay briefly alludes to a major failing in some ACOG teaching --- the heresy of replacement theology. This is the error that the church has replaced Israel.
Gordon Feil wrote:
Prophetic error doesn't prove that other doctrines are wrong.
That's true. Prophetic error simply proves that God isn't inspiring the organization to teach the truth. However, just as a broken clock will be correct once or twice each day, an organization that isn't inspired by God may indeed teach the occasional correct doctrine.
It may not prove it, Gordon, but it certainly raises questions about those doctrines. We were taught that knowing, teaching, and observing those doctrines was why God blessed the church with the “correct” understanding of end times prophecy. This is why there is such reluctance to admit that the prophecies were totally wrong. It’s also why different splinter group leaders keep trying to tune up the equation with minor doctrinal modifications. James Malm has made a full time hobby of this.
BB
The article is right in claiming that the leaders of these ACOGs are masters of delusion. They learnt from the master delusionist, HWA.
Gordon Fell said..."Prophetic error doesn't prove that other doctrines are wrong."
True. But, what does God's Word say about those who utter wrong predictions in the name of God?
"The false prophet, specifically one who tried to entice the people to idolatry, was to be executed (Deuteronomy 13:1-11), as were the people who were so influenced (Deuteronomy 13:12-18)" (from Apologetics Press).
"The penalty for false prophecy, including speaking in the name of a god other than YHWH or speaking presumptuously in YHWH's name, is capital punishment (Deut. 18:20). Likewise, if a prophet makes a prophecy in the name of YHWH that does not come to pass, that is another sign that he is not commissioned of YHWH and that the people need not fear the false prophet (Deut 18:22)" (from Wikipedia).
The answer is they deserve the death penalty. So all through his ministry right up to his death HWA uttered false prophecies making himself a false prophet worthy of capital punishment according to God's Word.
Did HWA ever repent of this gross sin? I doubt it seeing his publications with his false prophecies were still widely distributed even after his death (I came into the WCG post-1986) and most of his followers continue this sin to this day.
His "other doctrines" is another matter since most of his beliefs, if not all, came from other Christian groups (Adventism, British-Israelism, Catholicism, Church of God Seventh Day, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, etc.) so you'd really have to look at these doctrines separately to his prognostications.
SHT wrote: "...any belief in their prophetic interpretations today can only be attributed to an acceptance of lies and an inability to renounce what must be renounced, if truth is the yardstick one measures by..."
If truth is the yardstick, then we could possibly say that Don Ward (choose another group leader) is a deceitful worker, possibly transformed as a minister of righteousness, like other hirelings during the Apostle Paul's day:
2 Cor 11:13-15 "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming …for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light… it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness..."
If truth is the yardstick, then could Don Ward (choose another group leader) be of the devil, like other hirelings during Jesus's day?
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." (John 8:44)
SHT mentioned the word "lies" at least 5 times in his post, and that is one of Satan's biggest works within human beings: verse 44 above and the following:
"He that committeth sin is of the devil..." I John 3:8
A lie spoken in ignorance, or willingly, is still a sin, but how could a Donald Ward (choose another group leader) commit such sins? James tells us:
"…The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?" James 4:5
Is that scripture truth? Lust and envy, like lies, are fruits/works of a spirit that "dwelleth in us:" including Don Ward (choose another group leader).
So, why is it possible for people to have "an acceptance of lies and an inability to renounce?"
For any hireling ministers today who might be offended: if Jesus Christ walked this earth today, He'd possibly give them/us this response:
Matthew 15:13 "...Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
:14 "Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."
For any who may think Satan can't get to a Don Ward, Satan does not influence anybody, but he is able to "take prisoners" at his will, and those prisoners have "no clue" as to what is happening:
2 Tim 2:26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will."
If truth is a yardstick? It is God who give/grants repentance (2 Tim 2:25).
Unless that repentance is granted the blind will lead the blind, and there are all sorts of "ditches" to jump to/from.
When it comes to religion, if you were Satan, allowed to do all that that vile, evil, thing does: how would you do it? Would you try to control some widow's life? Or, would you control a "top leader," who in turn can "influence" multitudes of others?
Satan is the god of this present, evil, world.......and that evil is not very far from anyone of us:
"I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me." Romans 7:21
That is a law! And, speaking at least for the Apostle Paul, sin isn't very far away:
Romans 7:20 "Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me."
That sounds like a law of sin and death!
Why is it that people can't choose to stop sin (repent?), choose to never sin again, and make their decision stick for the rest of their lives? Some of the answers are found in the verses above.
But, why is it possible for people to have "an acceptance of lies and an inability to renounce?"
Could there be something to the following truth?
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Jeremiah 17:9
Time will tell...
John
The entire concept of basing a church on their supposed grasp of "prophecy" is a huge mistake. First of all, it is fear motivated and appeals to the "what's going to happen to ME" in us all. This is also the Adventist main public calling card. We just had some group swamp Portland with lectures on "Revelation and the End Times" and I am sure they drew the fear based, curious, insecure and radical types. They did not like on their FB ads that I mentioned the Book of Revelation is a failed first century prophecy intended only in the run up to the destruction of Jerusalem and meant to encourage the Jewish Christians to hang in there. In three and half years the Romans would be history. We know the outcome.
Prophecy, meant for the people to whom it is issued is a weak leg to stand on.
There is NO prophecy in the OT about Jesus. That is a construct of the NT authors using the OT to write their story. No Jewish person whose scriptures they are would ever see Jesus in their Book with good reason.
Contrary to WCG views and those of the splinters, the Jewish Scholars do understand their own book and the veil that Paul turned into a blindfold and whose story of Moses wearing one was turned upside down by him to make a point that is simply not true. If ever there was an explanation by Paul of the law and Moses, it is his upside down reversal of the Moses and the Veil he wore when not speaking to God tale.
Compare the original story to Paul's use of it, typical of NT writers but not true to the story and in this case, the exact opposite conclusion to it's meaning.
2 Corinthians 3:13 13We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing THE END OF WHAT IS PASSING AWAY.
Exodus 34:29-35 29When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the LORD. 30When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, HIS FACE WAS RADIANT, and they were afraid to come near him. 31But Moses called to them; so Aaron and all the leaders of the community came back to him, and he spoke to them. 32Afterward all the Israelites came near him, and HE GAVE THEM ALL THE COMMANDS the LORD had given him on Mount Sinai. 33WHEN MOSES FINISHED SPEAKING TO THEM ME PUT A VEIL OVER HIS FACE. 34 But WHENEVER HE ENTERED THE LORD"S PRESENCE to speak with him, HE REMOVED THE VEIL until he came out. And when he came out and told the Israelites what he had been commanded, 35they saw that his face was radiant. Then Moses would put the veil back over his face until he went in to speak with the LORD.
Paul turned the veil moses wore after giving the people God's Law into a BLINDFOLD that the Law was now done away. That's classic making a scripture mean what it never meant!
Why does Dennis keep quoting the Bible to us if he doesn't believe it's true.
Why bother? Why not just watch movies or go fishing? I hear season two of Star Trek Discovery is worth watching.
Gordon Fail wrote:
"Prophetic error doesn't prove that other doctrines are wrong.
Irrelevant. Only the intellectually irresponsible assume things must be true until eventually they are proven false. But it's that irresponsible shifting of the burden of proof which is the life blood of religious belief. It's practically the very definition of faith.
I like explaining what the OT actually says and how NT authors played games with it
Dennis - some people cannot tolerate different opinions and ideas.
Note to the easily offended - you are not required to believe everything you read or hear, so don't get offended so easily. Some of you sound like the college students who find it devastatingly traumatic to have a speaker on campus who has a different mindset from theirs.
I don't always agree with Dennis. Sometimes I don't even agree with myself!
Chill out.
Of every 100 people 99 will have completely different opinions, even if they don't immediately voice them, or actually deny it. There are many, many opinions here at Banned. Dennis and I could not be more polarized on our viewpoints - but we still maintain civility and respect for each other. Not once has he condemned my personally spoken views, not once have I condemned his. It is this philosophy that allows this blog to be what it is. The word is simply respect.
SHT
Am I the only sane person here? Look at the body of evidence. Dennis is trying to rob people of their Christian faith. Look how many times he recently repeated that Christ was only dead for 3 days. That is not a difference of opinion. That is warfare. It's like the Pharisees who rejected entering the kingdom of God and hindered those who were trying. Where's the respect in any of this.
BTW, several months after I started attending services, my minister hinted that I did something wrong, then verbally bashed me. This happened several times. The holy spirit explained this ministers behavior by putting the words "fall by the wayside and I'II stop hurting you" into my mind. Crown stealing is not uncommon.
From the Elder : As a church of God the so called Poor man's church as we are known for for the 1300: We the old church of God of the New Covenant have always said the Prophecies are in two understanding, 1 that will not change and the other that if the humans of the world change and do God's will it will not come to past, the worldwide church had no understanding of this fact is what happen to them, along with the times D&A came alone and put them out of the we have all the answers because we are the so called lost tribe people, the D&A will tell anyone who they are, and so it did, Herb was wrong, and the pastors are wrong, but the war between them went to a place that God said no more, some 31,000 people are now in the old church of God of the New Covenant and doing great with the understanding that human all are the who-so-ever of God through Jesus and the person of the Holy Ghost the Three persons of One God. this church called the world wide has good people those who were do all they could to serve God but men got in the way, and refused to change.
Anon 11:52 PM wrote:
Dennis is trying to rob people of their Christian faith
If Dennis Diehl can rob you of your Christian faith, then your faith is built on the shiftiest of sand. A "faith" that is premised on the idea that you need to plug your ears and avoid hearing any criticism is a shallow faith indeed. If you are a Christian with God's indwelling Holy Spirit, you are supposed to have the spiritual strength to give an account of your own faith which will stand up to the scrutiny even of those who ultimately disagree with your account.
In other words, if someone can debate you out of God's Church, you were never in God's Church to begin with.
Anon 11:52, I agree with you. I have sympathy for Dennis and will read some of his postings when I can tell it is primarily giving a bit of insight into the troubled WCG. Yet, I know Christ is in my life and that His Spirit changes and supports me. There is nothing counter to that that has value and can change that reality. I suppose some can gain insight into how some agnostics/atheists think, but I have read enough from Dennis and many others (not on this website) to get that. I don't believe chasing down every point he or others make is a good use of time and a constant diet of doing so can reduce the joy in one's life that Christ brings. Many times I have created counterpoints to many atheists, but only a few times has it had a lasting positive effect, and this with those that our truly searching for answers.
At this time, I don't believe Dennis is looking for or even accepting something counter to his current views; I don't mean that disrespectfully to Dennis as that is something common among men depending on the topic. The Lord tells us to guard our hearts, minds, and thoughts. I think the time to engage someone is when the Lord has softened the heart of the individual; and you can generally tell. No offense intended; I trust the Lord's wisdom and mercy.
Anon11:52PM wrote (with no sense irony whatsoever):
"Am I the only sane person here? Look at the body of evidence....The holy spirit explained this ministers behavior by putting the words "fall by the wayside and I'II stop hurting you" into my mind."
Was anybody here accusing you of being the only sane person here?
What sane person claims 1) that a disembodied alien presence is responsible for their thoughts, and 2) that he knows the identity of said alien presence?
YOU asked US to LOOK AT THE BODY OF EVIDENCE! YOU asked US! Did you notice that? Did you also happen to notice that you DIDN'T ask us to mere take it on faith? Why not?
So where is the body of evidence to support either one of those two assertions? WHERE? If you have it, please present it.
Did you ever stop to think that Dennis is not trying to rob anyone of anything, but is merely trying to get people to LOOK AT THE BODY OF EVIDENCE?
Before you go declaring war on anybody, you need to take a step back and consider your own words.
Follow your own advice and go look for a legitimate body of evidence for the legends and hearsay you've spent a lifetime accepting without evidence. If you make a sincere effort to do this, you'll be surprised at what you find. I certainly was.
Had a hard time understanding your comments, 4:55. Everyone has heard of the D&R doctrine, but what is the D&A?
BB
Anon 11:52 Crown stealing is not uncommon.
I think you touched upon a great truth. I think crown stealing is rampant within the churches. And unfortunately its the Minisry eyeing up others crowns.
5.57 AM
What you seem to ignore is that Christians can be spiritually weak or sick. Christ threatens those who might try to trip up new Christians by warning that it would be better if a millstone was hung around them, and thrown in the sea. This acknowledges Christian vulnerability. Satan "seeking those whom he may devour" is another example of Christian vulnerability. Dennis isn't targeting the healthy but the spiritually weak.
8.23 AM one of my work bosses was a sadistic psychopath. The end result? A glance at Dennis tells me what he is. That is, I recognise his negative traits. I don't really need a body of evidence at this point in my life. Not on this point. Recognition cues are sufficient.
12:22 Then quit commenting to or about him. One thing is damn sure, if as you say that Dennis is targeting the spiritually weak, God is allowing it. It's not your job to override what has has set in place. This forum isn't your own little "flock" to protect so shut the hell up. It's my personal opinion that you are most likely the spiritually weak one!
I for one am tired of all the whining about Dennis' posts. It's Gary's blog, he decides the content not you. Don't like it? Please let the blog door hit your whiney ass on the way out!
Kevin McMillen
Kevinmcmillen64@gmail.com
8:23 I'm definitely not defending 11:52's ignorance but when you first became a Christian did you honestly think that the bible was real hard evidence that God existed?
If so I've got 2,000 acres of perfectly level land for sale in WV.
If you didn't understand that the entire bible is to either be taken by faith or thrown out by lack of faith, then I pity you.
I pity anyone who thinks the bible can be physically proven without a shadow of a doubt.
I also pity anyone who thinks they've proven without a shadow of a doubt that the bible is false.
Being raised in the WCG I knew at a young age that the bible can only be trusted by faith, nothing else. Only a fool comes along later and argues to the contrary.
Kevin McMillen
Kevinmcmillen64@gmail.com
Kevin - by faith, do you mean you have faith that the Bible is inerrant and 100% true?
Kevin McMillen wrote (with no sense irony whatsoever):
"I'm definitely not defending 11:52's ignorance but...I knew at a young age that the bible can only be trusted by faith, nothing else."
So let me get this straight...
It sounds to me like you're saying:
When you were a very young child, and therefore at least as ignorant as 11:52's ignorance, which even you say is too great to be indefensible...
That would be the time when you "knew" 1) the bible was trustworthy 2) that "faith" was a reliable method to establish its trustworthyness, and 3) faith had established that it was indeed trustworthy.
And with time, as a person matures and become less ignorant, that would be the time when he's even more foolish?
???
I, too, was fooled and bamboozled by people I trusted from day 1, just like you, but I wouldn't look back and say that I "knew" anything at that young age. I was indoctrinated. I trusted my parents for biological reasons, not for rational ones. That doesn't constitute "knowledge."
"I also pity anyone who thinks they've proven without a shadow of a doubt that the bible is false."
Do you also pity anyone who thinks they've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the qur'an or the Epic of Gilgamesh is false?
Who automatically accepts everything, or for that matter, anything, let alone a tale featuring talking animals, as true until such time that it might eventually proven to be false? Be consistent, Kevin. Don't shift the burden of proof only for one tall tale, meanwhile being more than willing to accept that other tall tales are false just on the probabilities alone. Don't cheat and put your thumb on the scale for one, but not for others.
Besides, archaeology, just for one, has already proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the bible is false. (Hint: archaeology is a body of evidence. We should look at it, just like 11:52 said. Even a broken clock is right twice every day.)
Think, Kevin. It's not too hard. Anybody can do it. You can too.
And don't cheat by putting your thumb on the scale. Do you agree that cheating is wrong? If so, you shouldn't do it. Not even for Jesus.
TLA I believe it's inerrant on the important things. I don't give a damn if there were 6,000 in whatever army or 5,000. Those errors are nitpicking.
Do we have a document written by men or God? As far as I know God has only claimed to write one thing, the Ten Words. So I have no problem with the minor errors.
The same goes for truth, in the important matters I believe it's 100% true, but again to be inerrant and 100% true it would have had to have been written by God. It wasn't!
This is why I believe it's important to get back to the "original" (original meaning the oldest copies we have, not necessarily the language it was first written in) language as much as we can. The modern versions are full of errors, including the KJV.
I was never taught in the WCG that the bible was 100% inerrant and thus 100% true. I was taught it was God breathed, God inspired, not God written.
Anyone claiming that WCG taught an inerrant bible doesn't know what they're talking about. It was clearly taught that 1 John 5:7 & 8 were not in all manuscripts, and other verses as well.
How can the KJV or any other version be 100% accurate with all the italicized words added in order to make sense in English? Many of the original meanings get lost in translation.
One example is "mia ton sabbaton", translated first day of the week, but that's not what it says. Translator bias gave us that phrase and now we're told that first day of the week was the ancient name for Sunday. No it wasn't, the name for the day after the Sabbath was the day/morrow after the Sabbath. Mia ton sabbaton means first the sabbaths, or first the weeks, which is clearly talking about the first of the seven week count to Pentecost.
But today we have bias on all sides. I just explained my bias for that particular translation. Those who keep Sunday will have their bias for the first day of the week translation.
With so much confusion about what the bible is really saying, don't judge anyone for Sunday keeping, don't judge anyone for Sabbath keeping, don't judge anyone at all, we have more to worry about than if the bible is 100% accurate, 90% accurate, 70% accurate or just a damn lie. Honestly I don't care.
Am I going to let those facts mess with my faith? No!
Kevin McMillen
Kevinmcmillen64@gmail.com
Kevin
You have more posts than anyone else, yet you complain of people whining. Do you want this blog to be 100% Kevin McMillen?
While I was a kid, during the WCG part of my young life, I believed and trusted exactly what HWA made the Bible say. In our church areas, I can't think of any of my church friends who did question what we were taught at church. It may have been inconvenient from time to time for our social lives, but it was pretty much our day to day reality.
BB
Anon 4:59 PM said: "...Besides, archaeology, just for one, has already proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the bible is false."
According to whom? Your statement is mere conjecture not fact!
Kevin 5:14 PM said: "...But today we have bias on all sides. I just explained my bias for that particular translation. Those who keep Sunday will have their bias for the first day of the week translation."
You might be biased (as we all are in truth) Kev, but at least you're honest! ;-)
I find it quite telling when someone has to alter what's been said in order to make a point from their convoluted mind.I
I said: "I knew at a young age" yet it was changed to: "When you were a very young child,"
I said: "I'm definitely not defending 11:52's ignorance" and it was changed to: "as ignorant as 11:52's ignorance, which even you say is too great to be indefensible..." . Just where did I say anything was "too great to be indefensible"?
I said: "the bible can only be trusted by faith" and the change came back as: "when you "knew" 1) the bible was trustworthy".
Need I go on? I guess if one can't argue the points, twist the hell out of them. Much like the weapons that bible twisters employ!
Kevin McMillen
Kevinmcmillen64@gmail.com
The broad outline of world events supports HWA's prophetic vision, even though his specific prophecies were almost invaribly incorrect. Germany is reunited. Britain is in a mess trying to exit the EU. Under the rule of would-be Fuhrer Trump, American prestige in the world has fallen precipitously, and if he is re-elected the damage to American prestige will be even greater. All that's needed now is a worldwide economic disaster: not just a "great recession" but something similar to the Great Depression of the 1930's. That would tend to radicalize governments around the globe, and it is not hard to envision a German-led radical European Union --- free of Britain and with a nuclear-armed military --- arising to replace the void left by waning American influence. None of this is going happen overnight or in the "5-7 years" that is so often cited by COG would-be prognosticators. And it is possible that things won't play out this way at all; perhaps those of us who have been exposed to Armstrongian prophecy look at things with a confirmation bias that points us in a particular direction. Nevertheless, the stage is set and the play may well go in that direction, particularly as the middle of the 21st century approaches. I am no fan of HWA: I think he was greedy and morally unfit to be a minister of any sort, much less leader of a church, and many of his would-be imitators are no better. Some COG ministers and members are good people trying to do what is right; others not so much so. But whatever you think of him and them, the trend in world events is intriguing. Time will tell.
BB, If I'm correct you were a kid/teen/young adult in the WCG during the 60's and 70's, for myself it was pretty much the late 70's and 80's, totally different times. Things were much more strict during your years.
The WCG being a little more lenient, and the facts that at the age of 14 my mother left my father and with myself staying with my father who was very lenient compared to my friends parents, my teen years in the WCG were basically seat warming, and participating in "normal" activities with my High School friends not in the church I pretty much avoided most of the WCG hard ass rules.
I can completely understand the animosity that anyone would have in that strict world.
I knew a lady who grew up during the same era as yourself in the WCG. After getting to school she'd roll up the long dress that her mother made her wear, and rebelled as any normal kid would under strict rules.
One thing the kids in WCG who grew up with strict parents didn't have was Rumspringa as the Amish have. If they had there might have been more at least holding on to the basic doctrines while throwing herbies garbage out.
Kevin
Kevin:
You have a lot of good things to say, but when you are angry you turn into a jerk and people stop reading. Write in a civil manner if you want a good conversation.
2:16 why don't you go back through the thread to see just who it was who began writing like a jerk.
Apparently you haven't been paying attention, I do write in a civil manner to those who do likewise.
Who said I was angry? I'm blunt, and I won't be told what to do, not even by you, they tried in WCG but I won't allow it any more, so if you want to read my "good things" then do so, but shut up trying to tell me how to write, especially if you're not brave enough to give a name. For all I know you're the jerk I've been writing to!
Kevin McMillen
Kevinmcmillen64@gmail.com
2:16 If you're unable to identify the post that started the entire "being a jerk" it was the idiot complaining about Dennis. He/she comes to an anti HWA/WCG site and can't handle getting differing views. Much like yourself apparently.
We're not on a pie and ice cream social blog!
Kevin McMillen
Kevinmcmillen64@gmail.com
Anonymous April 24, 2019 at 7:27 AM said..."The broad outline of world events supports HWA's prophetic vision, even though his specific prophecies were almost invaribly incorrect. Germany is reunited. Britain is in a mess trying to exit the EU. Under the rule of would-be Fuhrer Trump, American prestige in the world has fallen precipitously, and if he is re-elected the damage to American prestige will be even greater. All that's needed now is a worldwide economic disaster: not just a "great recession" but something similar to the Great Depression of the 1930's. That would tend to radicalize governments around the globe, and it is not hard to envision a German-led radical European Union --- free of Britain and with a nuclear-armed military --- arising to replace the void left by waning American influence. None of this is going happen overnight or in the "5-7 years" that is so often cited by COG would-be prognosticators. And it is possible that things won't play out this way at all; perhaps those of us who have been exposed to Armstrongian prophecy look at things with a confirmation bias that points us in a particular direction. Nevertheless, the stage is set and the play may well go in that direction, particularly as the middle of the 21st century approaches. I am no fan of HWA: I think he was greedy and morally unfit to be a minister of any sort, much less leader of a church, and many of his would-be imitators are no better. Some COG ministers and members are good people trying to do what is right; others not so much so. But whatever you think of him and them, the trend in world events is intriguing. Time will tell."
I agree with your sentiments. The West is in its present untenable position as a result of the short-sighted policies of the past. For over 50 years we have foolishly enabled the rise of increasingly hostile nations which are now set on reconsolidating and reasserting their place in the world in a concerted effort to challenge the global hegemony of the US and its Western allies. The US, with its "normalization" of Sino-US relations over the last 40 years, which culminated, under the Clinton administration, with the granting of "Most Favored Nation" trade status to China (despite the vast differences in our respective culture and values), has indirectly funded the expansion of Red China’s increasingly aggressive armed forces and sophisticated surveillance and now finds itself constrained to remedy and redress the ill-advised and ill-considered wisdom of past administrations. Across the pond the UK finds itself in a similarly unenviable position with its decades-long financing and building of the increasingly German-dominated and anti-US EU. With the "unexpected" results of the Brexit referendum Britain now seeks to revive its Commonwealth trade relationships despite having sundered its own special trade ties with the "brotherhood of nations" over 40 years ago and urging them to seek ties elsewhere. Australia, as a case in point, sought to forge closer trading ties with its Asian neighbors, predominantly China, following America's short-sighted example. Alas, it's not too difficult, for me at least, to imagine where this will all lead and, dare I say it, we won't be entirely blameless for having sown the seeds of our own downfall.
Every time I read something like this, I say “Who cares?” I got to live the life that Armstrongism taught I’d never be able to lead. In spite of them, I never became the square peg in a round hole that they attempted to force, in the name of their so-called end times, and cultural misappropriation. My own sentence in Armstrongism was commuted after 18 years, and after that point, rehabilitation led to an increasingly good life.
Whatever happens to the next generation is their role in history to deal with. At times it looks bleak, but humans are very resourceful. The naysayers tend not to factor that resourcefullnes in as they peddle their fear-induced agendas.
BB
Echoing with 7:27 and 7:49, history suggests that we have some time before the start of WW3.
As I have argued here before, the closest historical period that may provide a guide to the future is the ten years from the 1929 Dow top to the 1939 start of WW3 with the invasion of Poland.
If we say the Dow peaks at over 33,000 in 2020 then using the above, 2030 gives some idea. While history repeats because human nature doesn’t change what is ahead is only a rhyme of it. From the end of the so-called great depression of the nineteenth century to the start of WW1 there was some 18 years.
Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
As HWA and the splinters don’t understand it, they haven’t preached the GN of the KOG; so it is yet future; and may require some time.
Typology suggests that as the Israel of God, with the OT and NT, are looking forward to an earthly reign of the Messiah at His second coming, they will be wrong, just as the southern house of Israel, with the OT were looking forward to the earthly reign of the Messiah at his first coming.
I would suggest that when the new work begins they will not be making the mistake identified by Andrew Fausset in the nineteenth century, well before HWA was born:
“The mistake of the Chiliasts [now known as Premillennialists, which include the COGs] was, they restricted the kingdom to the terrestrial part. Besides this earthly glory [of physical Israel], there shall be the heavenly glory of the saints reigning above" (A.R. Fausset, 1 Corinthians, JFB, Vol.3, p.298).
members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/id121.htm
Above is a link to what I call the “Anglo-American Hegemonic Cycle - Cycles of War and Prosperity” - a very amateurish template for the future - nothing like Martin Armstrong’s Economic Confidence Model.
John will be right on this: Time will tell.
Five years from now will be a better time to evaluate the future as the US is still in an upwave. The future may look different in a downwave; with a civil war looming?
Always looking for an opportunity for the old HWAcaca prophecies to finally turn out right, broken clock style.
There will be wars, economic cycles, weather extremes, famines, diseases, etc, as there have been through history. Anyone who is still waiting for the HWA prophecy mold will die waiting. Today is Nisan 16, 5779. Even if you believe in the heretical “6,000 years for man” doctrine, you’ve only got 226 years to wait.
COGlodytes should lighten up and live a little! As someone’s Granny used to say, “Have some fun this evenin’, but don’t sin!”
BB
"they restricted the kingdom to the terrestrial part"
No!
For WCG that was "just" the millenium.
The "Kingdom of God" would be the ever expanding "Family of God" throughout the Universe(s). Ever creating, ever expanding etc The headquarters of Star Trek Federation would be in Jerusalem.
nck
7:49
I like that analysis. It has been my central theme on the blogs that HWA seemed to have been 100 percent correct always...........but not really...............
I however do not think that is due to special prophetic insight but moreso to the fact that HWA had an instinctive or perhaps other insight into "a blueprint for the world."
One of those would be the "Rockefeller manifesto" and just plain old post war US foreign policy papers. As for instance European Unification had been official US policy since WWII.
Especially anti communist message "opened many doors" on CIA radio stations.
What some have labelled "hwa's racism" are when one would really read the articles, designed as an anti communist message and in par with US domestic and foreign policy.
Time will tell if it is the "biblical blueprint" that Shakespeare called "All the worlds a Play," or the Rockefellers blueprint.
Whatever it is. Shakespeare is right anyway as he LIKE ME, has been privy of the puppet players behind the facade. Nothing secret about that. Ordinary people just don't have the inclination to be bothered by boring things like "policy papers".
And I guess HWA was right too as he was privy to the UN and most world leaders concerns during his time.
nck
You are right, Kev. Sometimes it can be a pie in the face blog!
;-) BB
BB, yep. And my tone is determined by the tone of the person that I'm writing to. I've been on church blogs since 1995, Likeminds being the first, so I'm well prepared at defending myself.
Most of my online arguments come from people attacking others and for whatever reason I like to defend the "underdogs" if they're in the right. Not saying that Dennis is an underdog. ��
Most likely this is one of my many faults, but anyone who really knows me know that I can be the nicest guy in the world, just don't piss me off because I won't back down.
Kev
Enough about the anonymous posters here. That is their right. Many are still in groups that could cause issue if they printed their names. Just give it a rest about people attacking each other too. One post is enough.
Thanks No2! I am sick of the constant bellyaching about anonymous posts. Most of us have reasons why we do.
3:16
If you are a regular contributer who thinks there is some merit to your postings and should be read and taken seriously, a monnicker like,"possum", or,"greenville", eases the conversation.
If you feel your contribution is unique and of extreme newsvalue, you can still choose the anonymous function.
In that case you will be identified anyway, I mean who would "know" that and put it here?
I hardly engage in discussion with "comments" but I do with "people" even if they are recognizable by certain syntax or an incessant harping on one particular subject that seems important for their life, is indeed of interest to me, either by its value or plain awful repetition (or mentioning of hitler).
Nck
People are goong to do what they’re going to do. Fortunately, we all have our mental filters. Repetition of agendas or the same ten stories over and over may be boring, but the comments that spawns can often be different and interesting. There’s enough of interest going on here to keep me engaged.
Anonymous posters don’t really bug me unless they are offensive.
BB
"but the comments that spawns can often be different and interesting"
That's true!
I made a repetitive comment on wcg and BB came up with "Rappacini's Garden".
And Hoss just made a funny joke on the "Medicine Man" topic.
Oh wait, I just realized I'm referring to known unknowns and not unknown unknowns.
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.
nck
Post a Comment