Sunday, December 30, 2018

Allie Dart Properties Update By Wes White


Allie Dart Properties Update
By Wes White

            As a result of my December 28 post about the dispute over the four real estate properties gifted by Allie Dart to four individuals, I received a call last Sabbath from a man I will refer to as “a close friend of two CEM board members.” He asked me to keep his name confidential, so I will honor his request.   Let’s call him David.  This is not his real name. 
            David told me that there were two errors in my December 28 post.  He pointed out that the title of my post was incorrect in that CEM does not technically have a lawsuit against the estate of Allie Dart.  (More about that in a moment.)  And he said that, while Skip Martin is very clearly named as the executor of Ron’s will, David had made it clear that (while Ron was alive) Skip stated he was not going to perform that service for the Darts.  (More about that in a moment.) 
            Let’s start with the title of the post which mentions CEM suing the estate of Allie Dart.  David is right that this title was incorrect.  Let me explain.  When I sent the post, I did not include a title.  The title was added by the Banned people who wrote the title and genuinely believed it was correct.  They wrote the title in good faith and it was an honest mistake.  When most people hear the words lawyer or attorney, they usually assume a lawsuit.   When the post first came out, I didn’t even notice the title because I was regularly monitoring the Comments section only.  After my letter was posted, I didn’t even read the post itself because I was just hitting the “Comments” button.  I should have paid closer attention.  This was my mistake.  For that reason, I apologize to Banned and its readers and to CEM.  It was never my intention to mislead.  
            In the meantime, Banned has corrected the title and I thank them for this. 
But I must stress that, other than the title, I stand by what I wrote in the article and I can state with a clear conscience that I had spent much time reviewing the article for accuracy before I submitted it.  Again, I acknowledge my error regarding the title. 
            During my conversation with David, he made two points that I believe need addressing.  They are important points!  They are as follows:
            First, David stated emphatically that the CEM board is NOT the cause of all this endless litigation that’s going on over the estate of Ron and Allie Dart. David placed the blame for this mess squarely on Ron’s family.  
Second, David stated emphatically that, if Ron were alive, Ron would NOT be for the existence of RLDEA. 
            Let’s first deal with who is the cause of the current endless litigation. And this is an important point because everyone knows that Ron taught against taking a brother to court.  And I have been told on more than one occasion that the CEM leadership is trying to deflect blame for being the ones who got the ball rolling on all this litigation that is costing all sides tons of money – money that could be better spent on preaching the Gospel and feeding the flock and helping the poor.   This fable about CEM not being the initiators of this litigation is being spread throughout the Armstrong movement.  It is not true.  
So I have created a timeline of events on how all this got started:
            During the October 2017 Feast of Tabernacles at Land Between the Lakes, I met with a CEM board member and with a man who later became a CEM board member. In that meeting, I expressed my disappointment that I had just learned about CEM hiring a litigating attorney. Both guys were unapologetic about this turn of events and made it clear that anyone who sits on the CEM board has a “fiduciary responsibility” (their words) to do what’s best for the corporation known as CEM – even if it means suing people who are in the church!   In other words, corporate loyalty trumps relationships between brethren.  
            At that time, Cathy was executing Allie’s will.  It was about that time that she had given the property deeds to Phillip Hufton and Dianne McDonnell.  It was also during this time that she had given Allie’s gifts (as prescribed in the will) to various friends of Allie’s.  Gifts like cars, dishes, cash gifts, dining room furniture, etc.  
            When CEM found out that Cathy had turned the deeds over to Phillip and Dianne, that’s when they hired an attorney to contact Allie’s estate attorney for the purpose of stopping Cathy from disposing of Allie’s properties.  And what was their basis for insisting that Cathy stop disposing of Allie’s properties?  They made it clear that this was community property and that Ron’s will provided for an inheritance to CEM.  The CEM lawyers were insistent that Ron’s will was going to go into a settlement phase or be probated.  
So, Cathy was informed by Allie's estate attorney that CEM had acquired legal representation in late September of 2017.  However, as a sidebar, CEM had already begun making demands before the hiring of their attorney was announced.  On August 18, 2017, just fivedays after Allie's funeral, Cathy received an email from the CEM board president (Willie Oxendine) requesting a timeline of when all of Allie's properties would be transferred over to CEM.  I have seen this letter and was appalled at the board’s callous insensitivity.  Again, we had only buried Allie five days prior.  
            Over the next few months, there was debate between Allie's estate lawyer and the CEM lawyers about whether or not Ron’s will should be probated.  By this time, CEM had hired a second legal team. Note that the surviving Dart family members are nowhere in this picture!  Also, Cathy's only legal representation at that point was Allie's estate attorney -- not a litigating attorney -- but a mere estate attorney.
            By the time January 2018 came around, it was clear that if anything was going to move forward, Ron’s will would indeed need to be probated.  Then the question was, “Who would be the executor?” The will that Ron signed clearly said that Skip Martin was to be executor.  I remember that, at that time, we were wondering why Skip had not taken the will down to the courthouse to get it into probate.  Personally, I had no idea Skip was refusing to execute the will at that time.
            When it became clear that Skip was not going to probate the will and that CEM was trying to do a settlement agreement on their own terms, Cathy suggested that Ron’s niece (Jamie) volunteer to be executor.  Jamie volunteered and the probate court judge then appointed her as administrator of Ron’s will.  If Jamie had not become administrator of Ron’s will, we would still be at a stalemate with nothing moving forward.   
            Should Ron’s will have been executed?  We now know the answer is yes.  This is the lawful thing to do.  CEM is entitled to an inheritance, whether Allie condoned it or not.  It is the law.
            The problem in all this comes when CEM tells its supporters that it was Ron’s relatives who started all this legal stuff.  Ron’s relatives were not sitting around thinking of ways to get their hands on estate money.  They were perfectly content with Allie’s will carrying the day and only got involved in Ron’s will AFTER CEM made it clear that Ron’s will was going to be put into probate one way or another.  Yet, I have also been told by another person who is a friend of CEM board members that “one of Ron’s nieces” is the reason a final settlement can’t be reached.  This is not true.  All of Ron’s relatives ever wanted was to get this thing behind them as quickly as possible.  This still want this.  Meantime, it is all being held up because CEM is attempting to micro-manage the settlement to their favor and are refusing to negotiate fairly. 
            Now let’s deal with David’s claim that, if Ron were alive, he would be against the existence of RLDEA.  
            I asked him directly, “What makes you so sure that Ron would be against the existence of RLDEA.  How can you be so adamant?”  He replied that he was a friend of Ron’s for twenty years and had spent much time talking to Ron.  He said that Ron had told him he wanted everything that he and Allie owned to go to CEM after their deaths.  (For the record, shortly after Ron's accident in 2010, Ron and Allie told me they were no longer on speaking terms with David due to bad behavior on his part.)
            Here’s where the logic of David falls flat.  David is making a judgment based on a snapshot in time of what Ron was thinking at a particular moment.  David does not take into consideration that Ron just might have changed his thinking if he were to know the events that would take place after he died.  In any attempt to divine Ron’s thinking, we have to ask questions like this:  “Would Ron have still wanted all his assets to go to CEM if he knew that his wife was going to be mistreated by the CEM board after his death?”
            Now let’s be clear.  I cannot say with 100 percent certainty that the CEM board mistreated Allie after Ron’s death.  I can only tell you that Allie constantly complained to me (and many others) about the disrespect that she suffered at the hands of the board.  I have read emails between her and the board where she recounted things that were said in board meetings that were highly disrespectful. I have read emails from board members to Allie where they made promises to her that they broke shortly after her death. But again, I wasn’t there.  And neither was David.  So I think most observers should be careful when making a judgment as to whether or not Allie was mistreated by the CEM board.   
            With that in mind, in the same way that I cannot say that Ron would INDEED approve of RLDEA’s existence, David cannot say that Ron would NOT approve of RLDEA’s existence.  We can’t always predict someone’s future behavior because that behavior could be affected by events that happen after their deaths.  On one hand, I cannot say, “I knew how much Ron loved Allie and, therefore, I predict that Ron would have done this.”   And neither can David say, I knew how much Ron loved CEM and, therefore, I predict that Ron would have done that.”
            This line of predictive reasoning doesn’t always work.   However, one thing I can state with absolute surety is that Allie Dart definitely wanted RLDEA created before she died.  As Ron’s wife, she was convinced that this would have had Ron’s blessing.  And that’s all I needed to hear.  The widow of Ron Dart requested I set this up for her, so I did.  For all who are angry at me for helping her out, come on!  She was a widow who had very few people she could rely on.  Today, just about all of those who abandoned Ron and Allie after Ron’s accident are now against RLDEA.  
            Further, when David attempts to divine what Ron would or would not approve of today, isn’t he making the same mistake made by the worshippers of HWA?!?   Don’t so many of these groups – in their attempts to claim the mantle of HWA – emphatically state, “If Mr. Armstrong were alive today, he would back what we’re doing and he would be against what all those other groups are doing.”  This type of projection is an exercise in futility and it is wrought with pitfalls.  
And here’s is the most important point anyway:  Our Christian walk should never be, “This is what Mr. XXXXX would do if he were alive.” Instead, our metric should always be to concern ourselves primarily with what the Bible teaches.  Isn’t what is Scriptural the most importing thing?   
Yes, David and I both absolutely appreciate Ron’s efforts and Ron’s body of work.  But Ron was fallible.  As much as we loved the man, let’s not deify him.  Instead, let’s acknowledge the good work Ron has created and let’s promote it.  But let’s always look first to Jesus when trying to determine what should and shouldn’t be done.  Let’s not try to be like Saul when he attempted to divine the will of dead Samuel.  Saul should have been looking to God for guidance and not to a dead servant of God.
Again, I appreciate the conversation that we are having on Banned regarding this situation.  I welcome input and even disagreement from all people.  I am not perfect.  As I pointed out in the beginning of this post, I make mistakes.  
And, civil debate is healthy for us all – in spite of our beliefs on theology or church administration.
For those of us on this forum who claim to be followers of Jesus, we must always remember that Christianity is relational – not corporate.  How we treat each other personally is more important than any corporation.  With that in mind, I would like to close by recounting that David apologized to me for starting off our conversation with hostility in his voice.  After we reasoned together, he told me how his Baptist friends are helping him to learn how to show more love and patience to others. He also apologized to me for abandoning our friendship that we once had.  He acknowledged that his anger at me two years ago had nothing to do with anything I had done to him personally.  That was a big admission.  It is my hope that he will eventually understand that his misplaced anger at me was all over corporate issues.  He has much loyalty toward various COG leaders and lets that get in the way of his personal friendships.  He also asked if we could go back to being friends.  I praise God for David’s kind words and hope that some Christian good can come out of this mess. 

Is it possible to commit the Unpardonable Sin if you criticize the "Work"?

How You Could Commit the Unpardonable Sin!
by Herbert W. Armstrong March 1960 Good News Article
"But -- and here's where you need to TREMBLE IN FEAR! -- if and when you criticize or accuse or condemn THE WORK, THEN YOU ARE SPEAKING AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT -- and if and when you do that, YOU SHALL NOT BE FORGIVEN! You shall not be forgiven now, or in the world to come -- the WORLD TOMORROW -- during the millennium or during the Great White Throne JUDGMENT! This sort of thing always starts out with personal criticism and fault-finding against the one God has chosen and is using in the office of apostle in HIS WORK. But oh, brethren, how we have been grieved to see a few here and there along the way, thru the years, start out by finding fault against the human person of God's servant, and then in that disgruntled and embittered spirit proceed progressively into condemning THE WORK OF GOD, and denying that it IS the work of God. This work has grown too great and powerful to be the work of a human man, apart from either God or the devil. If this is not the very WORK OF GOD, then it must be that of SATAN. And to accuse it -- to condemn it -- I ask you, brethren, IS IT NOT MORE THAN POSSIBLE THAT THIS IS SPEAKING AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT, and therefore is the UNPARDONABLE SIN?"
The "work" has to be doing a godly work before it can even dare to claim to be above reproach.  Sadly our track record of the church acting in a godly manner has been horribly damaged by the likes of so many current church leaders.  That blame ultimately lies at the feet of Herbert Armstrong for allowing arrogance, narcissism, and visions of grandeur to infect the church.  The church that claims to be "true" has let its self be overrun by vile men who have been anything but godly and never more so than in the last 20 years.

Sure there were a lot or legalistic tyrants in the church before the great implosion, but the crop of tyrants currently running COG is appallingly evil.

What right does HWA have above saying that if you criticize the church that YOU SHALL NOT BE FORGIVEN!  That is a blatant lie! No man on earth has the power to even claim such a thing.

Even more importantly, speaking out against the current batch of lairs and abusers is NOT speaking against the Holy Spirit.  Rather, it is the liars and abusers of the brethren currently running splinter groups and "ministries" that are the ones "grieving" the Holy Spirit.  That is why I can, with confidence, call out the self-appointed false prophets and liars of the current COG leaders like Malm, Theil, Pack, Weinland, Flurry, Weston and others.


Saturday, December 29, 2018

Answering (Or Trying To) TLA's Questions and Opening the Table for Public Comments



TLA posed some questions concerning my last post I want to answer. With this disclaimer: 

I can only answer these questions in my personal perspective. Others will have different opinions. Don't take my answers as dogma. They are only the way I look at things. I'm not speaking on any pastoral authority, or claiming my answers are inspired. They are just how I see things right now. I'd like to publish this generally for open comments from our readers. Here are the questions posed by TLA. 

1) What about the other non-Christian religions? The followers can all follow the ways of peace and love if they choose, or follow them to hate - much like Christians have done. Does God only care about Christians?

There are many non-Christian religions - Hindu, Buddhism, Paganism, among scores of others. Many have believed in their dogmas and core doctrines as firmly as we believed in another Non-Christian religion - Armstrongism. (Yes, I know I just raised a ton of shackles with that statement, and I have my tomato shield up, but I have come to the conclusion that since Armstrongism ignores essential elements of Christianity, it is decidedly non-Christian. Even though it claims it is.  Scripture says God so loved the world that He gave his only Son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. Therefore, I believe that God cares about everyone. He is willing that none should perish but have everlasting life. I also believe that God can work in ways outside of the box that mankind has encased God in. We know nothing compared to the vast knowledge outside of our universe and our realms. The best answer is very simple in my opinion, and ties in with my last post: God works with each and every individual personally, and God will lead them to all truth in the best way for that person. You can't constrain the way God does things in a general blueprint, because, honestly, many people are beyond the blueprint. 

2) The origins of man in the Bible do not agree with DNA science - does this make Genesis into a telling of myths? If yes, does it matter?

Genesis, in my opinion, is allegory. In other words, written to primitive man in primitive dialogue. There are many fundamentalists who refuse to understand that God did not say how people came into being with college level text-books, but with a "See Jane run, run, Jane, run" method of speaking. This book was written far, far and away before anyone knew anything we know now. Since we have attained much increase in knowledge, many refuse to acknowledge our educated learning and throw it away to read a "Little Golden Book" and shut their minds to anything else. Genesis is simple allegory for what were, at the time, simple minds. 

3) The NT is built on the OT. With the exception of NT prophecy, the NT builds on the positive ways of life and love written about in the OT.

The NT is built on Jesus Christ, not the OT. The OT pointed to Jesus Christ. The NT is about Jesus Christ. You cannot build an entire testament on a testament that has been cancelled. You can't add on to a contract if the first contract has been cancelled. That does not cancel the eternal Royal Law of Love that has always existed - but was not generally revealed - to the OT peoples steeped in wickedness and abominable evil. 

4) NT writes that Christ's return will be unexpected - no one knows the day or hour. How then can we have a very precise three and a half year tribulation (Daniel) and a terrifying day of the Lord in Revelation with major warfare going on? Everyone with a Bible will know what is happening and there are probably over 100 million Bibles in existence.

Everyone with a Bible thought they knew what was happening with the Bubonic Plague, the Krakatoa Volcanic Explosion, the two World Wars, and every other historic extreme catastrophe that has happened since Jesus Christ came to reconcile man to the Father 2,000 years ago. Everyone who has ever thought they had the Return of Christ figured out has ended up on a massively long False Prophet list detailed in WIkipedia. When the next World War happens - the same thing will happen again. Remember Jesus said that when he returns, one will be in the field, one will be here, or there, and the other will be taken - and to stand watch, because He will come at a time when you know not. This does not seem to me to be an occurrence that can possibly happen in a World War - who would be in a field with nukes raining down everywhere? Who would be carrying on normal activities during the worst Armageddon in world history? 

""Two men will be working together in the field; one will be taken, the other left."
"Two women will be grinding flour at the mill; one will be taken, the other left."
""So you, too, must keep watch! For you don't know what day your Lord is coming."

"Your Lord" is very personal. 

"Understand this: If a homeowner knew exactly when a burglar was coming, he would keep watch and not permit his house to be broken into."

"You also must be ready all the time, for the Son of Man will come when least expected." (NLV)
For the one who was taken, Jesus had come. 
For the one who was not taken, Jesus had NOT come. 

Ponder on this. 

5) If you are an atheist, have you some convincing examples on how life started and how the building blocks of life came about by random chance, when scientists don't yet have any way of creating them on purpose?

N/A

6) There are miracles in this world - how do you explain these without Watchers who are invisible to us, and have power to intervene?

You cannot. They can be attributed as mental illness, delusions, coincidences, and so on and so forth - but none of these are true to those (see, plural) who have experienced such interventions. I, personally, would not be here today if not due to dramatic and wholly supernatural intervention. These events had consolidated and solidified my faith because there was absolutely no other conceivable explanation. As I have always said - the evidence is PERSONAL, and cannot be proven unless you, yourself, have experienced it. This is why I believe miracles can, and do happen, regardless of what church or what situation you are in. There are higher realms that we know not, that our physical world has no evidence for, but our spiritual mind through Christ can comprehend. Those who hear these stories and have not experienced them may well regard them as foolish, illogical, and unreasoned. Those who experienced these things, however, know they are not delusions, not illogical, and not unreasoned. They are as real and as true as the air we breathe and the ground we walk on, and the gravity that holds us down. It is personal. Personal. and again, Personal. 

Looking forward to the comments. Again. This is not inspired or dogmatic, and I'm not speaking in any way as if I have a full handle on these questions. These are simply my personal thoughts as I see them right now - subject to change. I'm not about to pull a Thiel or a Malm or a Weston on these answers, nor would I want to. I'm not standing at a podium here as I do when debunking Armstrong, I'm just sitting on the couch talking. Take my answers as such.