When Supermarket Freezers Become the Four Horsemen: Crackpot Bob Discovers the Beast Behind the Thawed Peas!

There are days when you wonder whether Armstrongism has finally exhausted its supply of prophetic absurdities, but then along comes Crackpot Bob Thiel to remind everyone that the bottom of the prophetic barrel apparently has a basement. This time, Bob has discovered a terrifying new development in the march toward the Great Tribulation: European supermarket refrigerators and freezers have been hit by cyberattacks! While ordinary people might see a cybersecurity problem involving vulnerable refrigeration systems, financial losses, and spoiled groceries, Bob Thiel sees something considerably more sinister lurking behind the thawed peas. Naturally, he sees the Beast Power!

According to Bob's latest prophetic idiocy, these attacks could help pave the way for the coming European Beast Power, who will supposedly promise protection and security to the frightened citizens of the world. Apparently, somewhere between the thawed hamburgers, spoiled dairy products, and discarded frozen vegetables, Bob has spotted the unmistakable fingerprints of the coming Antichrist. One can only imagine the excitement at. his mini headquarters. Forget international diplomacy, military alliances, economic upheavals, and the complicated political realities of Europe. Somebody has managed to interfere with supermarket refrigeration, and suddenly the prophetic alarm bells are ringing louder than a freezer temperature warning.

And naturally, we cannot have a discussion about the European Beast without dragging Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg into the picture. Bob has previously entertained the possibility that this German politician could become the mysterious King of the North. Apparently, Europe is not allowed to have a prominent German politician without Armstrongite prophecy enthusiasts wondering whether he might eventually become the Antichrist. Imagine the poor man's predicament. He could be attending a political meeting, having lunch, or simply trying to get through his day, completely unaware that somewhere in California a prophetic detective is examining his background and political connections while wondering whether he might someday control the world's frozen food supply. If Guttenberg ever visits a supermarket, he might want to avoid the freezer department. Bob could interpret it as a prophetic sign!

What makes this latest episode so ridiculous is the complete absence of evidence connecting a cyberattack against supermarket refrigeration systems to biblical prophecy. Criminals exploiting computer vulnerabilities is hardly a new development, and businesses suffering financial losses from cyberattacks is an unfortunate reality of modern life. There is absolutely no reason to imagine that a supermarket refrigeration problem is somehow preparing the world to accept the Mark of the Beast. Yet Bob takes an ordinary news story, connects it to a collection of speculative prophetic interpretations, introduces Revelation 13, and presents readers with another installment of his never-ending apocalyptic detective series.

In Armstrongite prophetic land, nothing is ever simply what it appears to be. A computer glitch becomes prophecy, a financial disruption becomes prophecy, an international disagreement becomes prophecy, and a new European regulation becomes another unmistakable sign of the coming Beast Power. Now we can add supermarket freezers to the growing collection of prophetic evidence. At this rate, if somebody burns the toast in a Brussels hotel, Bob will probably publish an article explaining how the smoke fulfills Revelation's warnings about the destruction of Babylon. Perhaps the next great prophetic breakthrough will involve a malfunctioning microwave, a broken dishwasher, or an unexpected shortage of frozen pizza.

The larger problem with Armstrongism is its endless need to find confirmation of its prophetic expectations in practically everything happening around the world. Herbert Armstrong spent decades predicting the imminent rise of a European superpower, the coming Great Tribulation, and the collapse of the present world order. Those predictions did not unfold as advertised, but the prophetic machinery never stopped running. Instead, the next generation of Armstrongite leaders inherited the machinery and continued feeding it newspaper headlines. Every generation gets its own collection of supposedly unmistakable signs, every international crisis becomes another opportunity to announce that the end is approaching, and every new technology becomes a possible instrument of the Beast. When the predictions fail to materialize, the explanations are adjusted, the timelines are stretched, and the prophetic spotlight moves to another politician, another country, or another headline.

There is also something particularly troubling about the constant fearmongering that accompanies these articles. Cybersecurity is a genuine concern, and attacks against businesses deserve serious attention, but there is a gigantic difference between explaining technological vulnerabilities and frightening religious readers with speculative claims about the coming Antichrist. Christians can take cybersecurity seriously without believing that every hacker is an unwitting employee of the Beast Power. They can recognize technological dangers without imagining that every digital innovation is a rehearsal for 666. Unfortunately, fear has become one of the most dependable products in the Armstrongite prophetic marketplace, where ordinary news stories are transformed into warnings that the Great Tribulation is just around the corner.

Christianity is supposed to be centered on Jesus Christ, the New Covenant, faith, grace, love, and the hope found in him. It is not supposed to be an endless exercise in identifying potential Antichrists, examining European politicians, decoding computer systems, and wondering whether the latest international news story is another clue that the world is about to end. Yet Armstrongism continues to encourage precisely this kind of obsessive prophetic speculation, leaving its followers constantly searching for the next frightening headline and the next supposed fulfillment of Herbert Armstrong's failed predictions.

Perhaps the most important question isn't whether a German politician will someday become the Beast. It is why certain religious leaders seem so dependent on keeping their audiences frightened about one. Fear is a remarkably useful tool when you are trying to convince people that you possess special prophetic insight that ordinary Christians supposedly lack. Unfortunately, Bob Thiel seems determined to demonstrate that virtually any news story can be transformed into another reason to worry about the end of the world.

So, the next time you visit your local supermarket, take a moment to appreciate the refrigeration department. Those freezers may be keeping your groceries cold, but according to Crackpot Bob's prophetic imagination, they could also be helping prepare the world for the Beast Power. Keep an eye on the frozen peas, watch out for suspicious German politicians, and whatever you do, don't let your ice cream melt without checking Crackpot Bob for the latest prophetic explanation.

The Four Horsemen may be coming, but apparently the frozen yogurt got there first!

One Man, One Computer, One Church in Administrative Chaos!

The 21st Century Watch: and its epic blunder.

The Intercontinental Church of God, under Mark Armstrong's leadership, has apparently encountered a technological catastrophe of biblical proportions. No, the Great Tribulation hasn't arrived, and the Beast hasn't taken over the Internet. The church has simply discovered that keeping an entire organization's information on one man's personal computer might not have been such a brilliant idea after all!

According to a recent announcement, elder Murray Allatt recently died, and apparently all of the ICG's information, including its mailing list for the 21st Century Watch magazine, was stored on his computer. Now that Murray has passed away, the church is struggling to recover the information and is asking subscribers to resubmit their mailing details. The announcement even explains that they don't wish to disturb his grieving wife.

First, let us express sympathy to Murray Allatt's family. His death is a personal tragedy, and his grieving wife deserves privacy and consideration. The criticism here belongs to the church leadership, not the deceased or his family.

But seriously, Mark, was there no backup? No second copy? No centralized database? No succession plan? Did the entire Intercontinental Church of God really place its institutional memory in the hands of one individual and one computer? Apparently, the organization that spends so much time warning the world about impending disasters never considered preparing for one of its own.

There is something particularly amusing about this happening to an organization publishing a magazine called 21st Century Watch. While its editors presumably watch world events, prophetic developments, and the coming Kingdom of God, the organization itself appears to have missed one of the most important technological developments of the last several decades: backing up your computer files!

Businesses, charities, small clubs, and even ordinary households understand the importance of protecting important records. Yet an entire religious organization apparently managed to put its mailing list and other essential information in one location, with no readily accessible backup. Now subscribers are being asked to help reconstruct what should have been safely preserved in the first place.

Perhaps the next issue of the magazine should be devoted to a newly discovered biblical truth: the lost doctrine of external hard drives! Maybe Herbert Armstrong simply overlooked that one when he was busy restoring all the other supposedly lost truths.

The larger question is what this says about Mark Armstrong's administration. Religious organizations don't demonstrate responsible leadership merely by publishing magazines, maintaining websites, and issuing prophetic warnings. They demonstrate it by taking care of the ordinary responsibilities entrusted to them. Protecting organizational records, planning for leadership transitions, and ensuring continuity are basic administrative duties, not advanced theological concepts.

Murray Allatt deserves sympathy, subscribers deserve better, and the ICG leadership might want to spend a little less time watching the end of the world and a little more time making sure its own files survive until tomorrow.

After all, if the Intercontinental Church of God cannot preserve its own mailing list from one generation to the next, perhaps its next great restoration should be a restoration of basic organizational competence.

The Kingdom may be coming, but the mailing list isn't coming back unless somebody remembered to make a backup!

Greetings,

 

The ICG brethren have asked me to assist in recovering their mailing list. As you may know, their elder, Murray Allatt died recently and all ICG information is on the PC. At this stage it is difficult to recover the information and of course, do not wish to disturb his grieving wife.

 

So, if you are a subscriber to the 21st Century Watch magazine – or would like to be – please send me your mailing details to pass on to them. There is no cost or obligation with subscribing to the magazine. https://www.21stcenturywatch.com

 

Samuel Kitchen: Wounded: The Hidden Cost of Carrying the Burdens of a Church

 

Wounded: The Hidden Cost of Carrying the Burdens of a Church

Just after the Feast of Tabernacles, Samuel posted one of his AI-generated songs on his Facebook and YouTube pages. It is titled "Wounded."

The lyrics tell the story of someone whose body is no longer functioning as it should, someone struggling with physical limitations and the painful realization that things are not quite right. Given that Samuel has missed his usual weekly Sabbath messages, some people are beginning to wonder whether the song might be a reflection of his own circumstances.

If it is, one cannot help but wonder whether the enormous burden of trying to manage, maintain, and continually revise a dead church is finally taking its toll. He is still a relatively young man, and it would be unfortunate if the responsibilities he has assumed were beginning to affect his health.

There is a very real price to be paid when one individual attempts to carry the responsibilities of an entire religious organization on his shoulders. Running a church is demanding enough under ordinary circumstances. Attempting to keep a disintegrating organization together, defend its teachings, answer critics, produce weekly messages, manage members, revise doctrines, oversee finances, and continually convince people that everything is moving in the right direction is an entirely different matter.

The psychological burden can be enormous.

Living under a constant sense of responsibility for the survival of an organization can produce chronic stress, anxiety, emotional exhaustion, and burnout. When someone begins to believe that the entire future of a church depends upon his personal efforts, there is little opportunity to mentally disengage. Every setback becomes personal. Every departing member becomes another problem to solve. Every criticism can feel like an attack on the very foundation of one's life's work.

Over time, that kind of pressure can interfere with sleep, concentration, emotional stability, and physical well-being. Chronic stress can also contribute to headaches, muscle tension, digestive problems, elevated blood pressure, and persistent fatigue. The mind and body are not separate entities that can be pushed indefinitely without consequences.

There is also the psychological isolation that can accompany religious leadership. When someone believes he alone possesses the answers, carries the responsibility, and must continually defend the organization, it becomes increasingly difficult to acknowledge personal limitations or ask others to share the burden. Admitting exhaustion can feel like admitting weakness, particularly in religious environments where leaders are expected to demonstrate unwavering faith and confidence.

But no individual is indispensable to the work of God, regardless of what some church leaders might believe about their own importance.

There is something particularly tragic about religious organizations that place so much emphasis on loyalty, obedience, prophetic authority, and institutional survival that the human beings involved become secondary to keeping the organization functioning. A church should be a source of encouragement, fellowship, and spiritual support. It should not become an institution that consumes the emotional and physical well-being of the person attempting to hold it together.

If Samuel's song is autobiographical, perhaps it offers a glimpse into the personal cost of carrying responsibilities that have become too heavy for one person. Of course, we cannot know whether his lyrics reflect his actual health or circumstances, and we should not assume that they do. Nevertheless, the broader issue deserves attention.

A religious organization is not worth sacrificing one's health, peace of mind, or personal well-being to preserve. No church administration, doctrinal revision, prophetic claim, or weekly Sabbath broadcast is worth that price.

Perhaps the most important lesson here is that a church is supposed to serve people, not consume them. When maintaining the institution becomes more important than the well-being of the people running it, something has gone terribly wrong.

And sometimes, the person trying hardest to keep the whole thing from falling apart is the very person who needs someone to remind him that he is allowed to put some of the weight down.

Getting out of bed In the mornin’ 

Stretch my legs as the sun hits my eyes 

Take some steps 

Feel the warnings 

Of systems overloading from days gone by 

My prime has gone way by 

And I and I and I don’t know how to take it 

My prayers are sent into the sky 

How can I run the race today starting out I’m wounded? 

System alarms oh they cry 

My body is screaming 

How can I run the race today starting out I’m wounded? 

People wanting something they can’t have 

They be hating 

Their eyes turn with hate as I grasp the things they wanted 

Take some steps 

Feel the warnings 

Of systems overloading from days gone by 

My prime has gone way by 

And I and I and I don’t know how to take it 

My prayers are sent into the sky 

How can I run the race today starting out I’m wounded? 

System alarms oh they cry 

My body is screaming 

How can I run the race today starting out 

I’m wounded? 

If I say that God hears everything 

Will you turn your heart to scream? 

If I say that God sees everything you do 

Come out of the shadows turn around and be a brand new you 

Because it’s hard your prime has gone way by 

And I and I and I know you don’t know how to take it 

So send some prayers up to God in the sky 

Go and run the race today starting out we’re wounded 

System alarms oh they cry 

My body is screaming but how the Lord shines 

Using us so wounded 

Go and run the race today starting out we’re wounded

 System alarms oh they cry 

My body is screaming but how the Lord shines 

Using us so wounded 

Go and run the race today starting out we’re wounded 

System alarms oh they cry 

My body is screaming but how the 

Lord shines Using us so wounded

The Communion of Saints vs.The Communion of Armstrongist Crackpots: Bob Thiel Declares War on Christian History!

Bob Thiel and Armstrongists seem to have an endless supply of things to condemn as pagan. Halloween? Pagan! All Saints' Day? Pagan! All Souls' Day? Pagan! Apparently, if something is practiced by Catholics, Protestants, or Christians outside Bob's little religious universe, it must be investigated for demonic contamination.

In his latest article attacking All Souls' Day, Bob trots out Catholic encyclopedias, historical references, and descriptions of Mexican Día de los Muertos traditions to establish that these observances are supposedly unbiblical and pagan. He spends considerable time discussing purgatory, prayers for the dead, and beliefs about deceased relatives returning to visit their families.

Some of his historical observations are legitimate. The Catholic doctrine of purgatory is not accepted by all Christians, and there is certainly no New Testament commandment requiring Christians to celebrate All Souls' Day. But Bob makes his usual Armstrongist leap: because some practices associated with these observances are questionable, remembering deceased Christians and honoring their lives must also be pagan.

That is Armstrongist theological nonsense.

Remembering the dead is not the same thing as worshipping the dead. Remembering a deceased parent, placing flowers on a grave, honoring Christian martyrs, or celebrating the faithfulness of believers who preceded us does not constitute communicating with spirits or embracing purgatory. Bob conveniently lumps entirely different activities together because doing so makes his argument sound more convincing.

Unfortunately for Bob, the New Testament presents a much broader understanding of the Christian community than his narrow Armstrongist theology allows.

Hebrews 12:1 speaks of a great cloud of witnesses surrounding us, immediately following Hebrews 11, which recounts the faithfulness of Abel, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and countless others. Their testimony remains an encouragement to Christians living today. Hebrews 11:39-40 even connects those faithful believers of previous generations with those who would follow them.

Imagine that! Christians can actually appreciate faithful believers who lived centuries before Herbert W. Armstrong appeared on the scene.

Romans 14:7-9 makes the point even more clearly. Paul explains that whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. Christ is Lord of both the living and the dead. The New Covenant does not divide God's people into an approved collection of living Armstrongists and a suspicious assortment of deceased Christians who happened to belong to other traditions.

Ephesians 2:19-22 describes believers as fellow citizens with the saints and members of God's household. Christianity is a continuing community of faith, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ as its cornerstone.

There is no mention of Herbert Armstrong, British-Israelism, or membership in one of today's competing Church of God splinter organizations as requirements for belonging to that household.

The New Testament also encourages remembrance. Hebrews 13:7 tells believers to remember those who taught them God's word and to consider the outcome of their lives. Paul remembers Timothy's grandmother Lois and his mother Eunice in 2 Timothy 1:5, recognizing the faith passed down through generations. In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul comforts grieving Christians with the hope of resurrection. He does not tell them that remembering deceased believers is pagan. He points them toward Christ.

That is the distinction Bob continually misses. Christians do not remember the faithful because they believe those individuals have become gods or that they can return to earth on a particular November evening. We remember because their lives mattered, their faithfulness influenced others, and their testimony remains part of the history of Christianity.

Nor does remembering deceased Christians require accepting purgatory. A Protestant can reject purgatory while honoring Christian martyrs. A Christian can reject prayers intended to shorten someone's supposed stay in purgatory while remembering deceased family members. These are entirely different theological questions.

Bob also conveniently overlooks Romans 14:5-6, where Paul explains that Christians may regard particular days differently and that each should be fully persuaded in his own mind. Colossians 2:16 likewise warns against allowing others to judge believers concerning festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths.

Does this mean every holiday is automatically Christian? Of course not. Does it mean Christians must celebrate Halloween, All Saints' Day, or All Souls' Day? Certainly not. It means that Christians have freedom of conscience and that religious leaders should be careful about inventing prohibitions and presenting them as commandments of God.

A Christian may observe All Saints' Day as an occasion to remember faithful believers. Another may ignore it. Someone else may celebrate Halloween as a secular community event. None of these choices automatically makes someone a pagan.

And here is another delicious irony. Armstrongism constantly condemns the traditions of other Christians while maintaining an elaborate collection of its own inherited teachings and practices. British-Israelism, Herbert Armstrong's restoration claims, prophetic interpretations, church eras, and the authority of successive splinter-group leaders are hardly direct commandments of the New Testament.

Yet Bob is apparently the appointed inspector of everybody else's religious traditions.

Why does Armstrongism continually celebrate Herbert W. Armstrong's legacy? Why are his photographs displayed, his writings preserved, his sermons circulated, and his teachings treated as authoritative decades after his death? Is remembering Herbert Armstrong pagan? Obviously not. Remembering someone and treating that person as an infallible authority are two entirely different things.

Christians can remember Herbert Armstrong without accepting his theology. They can remember Catholic saints without accepting every Catholic doctrine. They can honor Protestant reformers without agreeing with everything they taught. That is called exercising discernment rather than surrendering one's brain to an institutional leader.

The greatest weakness in Bob's article is his inability to recognize that Christianity is considerably larger than Armstrongism. Revelation 7:9 describes a great multitude from every nation, kindred, people, and language standing before the throne and before the Lamb. That is the New Covenant vision of God's people, not a tiny collection of Armstrongist splinter organizations competing over who possesses the most accurate prophetic interpretation.

The Christian faith is about Jesus Christ, His death and resurrection, grace, love, and the hope of eternal life. First Corinthians 15:20-22 reminds us that Christ is risen and that resurrection is the foundation of Christian hope.

Those who have gone before us are not erased from the story simply because their earthly lives have ended. Their faithfulness encourages those still running the race. We remember them with gratitude, mourn their absence, and place our hope in Christ.

So, Crackpot Bob, by all means reject purgatory if that is your conviction. Decline to celebrate Halloween if you wish. Ignore All Souls' Day if it doesn't appeal to you.

But stop confusing your personal religious preferences with commandments of the New Covenant.

The saints who have gone before us do not need your permission to be remembered. Their testimony belongs to Christian history, not to an Armstrongist historical revision committee.

Christianity existed long before Herbert Armstrong appeared, and it will continue long after the latest Armstrongist splinter leader has disappeared into the footnotes of religious history.

Perhaps Bob should spend less time hunting for paganism in everybody else's religious calendar and a little more time discovering the communion of saints. It has been part of the Christian story all along.

Gerald Flurry's Wonderful Little Doctrine of Christian Love: Abandon Your Children, Reject Your Parents, and Don't Forget to Call It God's Truth!

The Philadelphia Church of God: Destroying Families in the Name of Family Values!

Gerald Flurry's Wonderful Little Doctrine of Christian Love: Abandon Your Children, Reject Your Parents, and Don't Forget to Call It God's Truth!

There is something almost breathtaking about the hypocrisy of the Philadelphia Church of God (PCG), headquartered in Edmond, Oklahoma. Here we have an organization that wants to lecture the rest of America about the destruction of the family, the dangers of secular ideology, the breakdown of traditional relationships, and the supposed epidemic of people abandoning their relatives. And yet, this same organization proudly defends a teaching that instructs its own members to sever relationships with family members who leave the church or turn away from what Gerald Flurry declares to be God's truth. Apparently, destroying families is a terrible thing when somebody else does it. But when Gerald Flurry prescribes it, suddenly it becomes a sacred biblical responsibility!

Welcome to the peculiar immoral universe of Armstrongism, where family loyalty is celebrated right up until somebody decides they no longer want to belong to Gerald Flurry's religious empire. At that point, apparently, your son is no longer your son, your daughter is no longer worthy of ordinary affection, and your husband, wife, brother, sister, or parent can become a spiritual contaminant to be avoided. How wonderfully Christian!

The article published by the PCG's Trumpet Brief is particularly revealing. It discusses a book criticizing modern family estrangement and identifies several supposedly destructive cultural tendencies: excessive individualism, victimhood, intolerance, and the abandonment of family relationships.

The article then acknowledges that critics might notice something rather uncomfortable:

The Philadelphia Church of God actually teaches its members to cut off contact with family members who leave the organization.

Well, at least they admit it!

But rather than recognizing the enormous contradiction, the writer attempts to explain why PCG's version of family estrangement is somehow different. According to the article, secular estrangement is based on personal feelings, whereas PCG's estrangement is based on God's authority. There you have it. Apparently, if an ordinary person abandons a family member, it is selfishness. If Gerald Flurry tells someone to abandon a family member, it is obedience.

What an extraordinary theological loophole!

The PCG has built a religious system in which loyalty to the organization and its leadership can become more important than maintaining ordinary family relationships. A member who leaves the organization may discover that the consequences extend far beyond losing a church congregation. Relationships with parents, children, siblings, and other relatives can become casualties of the organization's teachings.

Think about what that means.

A mother may be pressured to distance herself from a son who no longer believes Gerald Flurry is God's chosen leader. A father may be expected to withdraw ordinary fellowship from a daughter who decides that she no longer accepts PCG doctrine. A husband or wife may find that their spouse's religious loyalty is being tested against their marriage. Children may grow up learning that affection and acceptance are conditional upon religious conformity. And relatives who simply want to maintain normal family relationships may find themselves caught in an ugly religious loyalty test.

This is not the preservation of the family. It is the weaponization of the family.

The PCG may dress this teaching in religious language, wrap it in biblical references, and insist that it is motivated by love. But changing the vocabulary does not change the consequences. When an organization makes family affection conditional upon remaining in its religious system, it has created a profoundly unhealthy environment. And when people experience the loss of family relationships because they leave a religious organization, the emotional consequences can be devastating. 

Former members have reported serious family disruption and psychological distress associated with these practices. Claims about specific deaths or their causes should be carefully documented rather than casually attributed, but the potential for severe harm should never be dismissed. Apparently, the PCG considers this an acceptable price for maintaining institutional loyalty.

The Trumpet Brief attempts to justify its doctrine by assembling a collection of New Testament passages:

Romans 16:17, 1 Corinthians 5:11, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 1 Timothy 6:5, Titus 3:10-11, and 2 John 10-11.

The implication is that these passages authorize the PCG's practice of separating members from relatives who abandon its religious teachings. But there is a rather substantial problem with that argument. None of these passages establishes a general command to abandon your children, parents, brothers, sisters, or spouses simply because they leave a particular religious organization.

The PCG is taking passages dealing with specific circumstances involving serious misconduct, divisiveness, false teaching, and Christian fellowship and attempting to turn them into justification for a much broader policy of family estrangement.

That is a considerable interpretive leap.

Here is what the New Testament actually teaches.

1. The command to love your neighbor was not suspended for people who leave your church.

Jesus said:

Matthew 22:37-40: Jesus identified love for God and love for one's neighbor as the two great commandments upon which the Law and the Prophets depend.

Notice what Jesus did not say.

He did not say to love your neighbor unless they stop attending your church. He did not say to love your children unless they reject your religious organization. He did not say to withdraw affection from your parents if they disagree with your interpretation of prophecy.

The command to love others is not a membership privilege distributed by religious organizations.

2. Jesus commanded forgiveness, not perpetual religious punishment.

Matthew 18:21-22 records Peter asking Jesus how many times he should forgive someone who sins against him. Jesus answered that forgiveness should not be limited to a numerical quota. Apparently, Jesus considered forgiveness rather important.

The PCG, however, seems to have discovered an alternative approach: determine whether the offender remains sufficiently loyal to the organization, and if not, maintain the separation.

That is a rather different emphasis!

3. Paul commanded believers to bear with one another.

Colossians 3:12-14 instructs Christians to put on compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, patience, forgiveness, and love.

Read those qualities carefully. Where is the instruction to make family relationships conditional upon continued membership in a particular denomination? Where is the command to abandon children who leave? Where is the instruction to treat relatives as spiritual hazards simply because they no longer accept the teachings of a church leader?

It isn't there.

Instead, Paul describes a Christian community characterized by patience, forgiveness, and love. Apparently, those qualities become inconvenient when institutional control is at stake.

4. Paul explicitly recognized family obligations.

First Timothy 5:8 states:

But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

That is an interesting passage for an organization that promotes religious separation from family members.

Paul emphasizes responsibility toward one's household.

He does not provide an exemption allowing religious leaders to override family responsibilities whenever someone leaves their organization.

And what about Ephesians 5:25?

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.

Did Paul add a footnote saying that husbands should stop loving their wives if they no longer believe Gerald Flurry is God's apostle?

Of course not.

Perhaps the most embarrassing New Testament passage for the PCG's family-separation doctrine is the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15:11-32.

A son leaves his father's household, takes his inheritance, and goes his own way. He makes disastrous decisions and eventually recognizes the error of his conduct.

When he returns, what does his father do? Does the father establish a policy of no contact?

Does he instruct the rest of the family to avoid the son until he demonstrates sufficient loyalty?

Does he consult a religious authority to determine whether the son is spiritually safe to embrace? Does he make the son complete a lengthy organizational reindoctrination program before restoring the relationship?

No!

The father welcomes him home. He embraces him, celebrates his return, and restores him to the family.

Jesus used this story to illustrate the Father's compassion toward those who repent and return.

It is a picture of mercy, reconciliation, and restoration.

The PCG would do well to spend considerably more time contemplating that parable and considerably less time explaining why family members should be abandoned.

The father in Jesus' story was interested in getting his son back.

The PCG's teaching risks turning the family into another enforcement mechanism for religious conformity. What a difference!

One of the most glaring problems with Armstrongism is its tendency to take isolated biblical passages and turn them into institutional regulations designed to maintain control over members. The New Covenant, however, places enormous emphasis on the transformation of the heart.

Jesus did not establish a system in which religious leaders could demand that Christians abandon their families whenever someone disagreed with their interpretation of Scripture.

Consider the words of Jesus in John 13:34-35:

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you...

He continued by explaining that love would identify His disciples. Not organizational loyalty.

Not attendance records. Not obedience to Gerald Flurry. Not the willingness to shun a family member.

LOVE.

That was the identifying characteristic Jesus gave His disciples.

And what kind of love did Jesus demonstrate?

He associated with people religious authorities despised. He showed compassion toward sinners. He welcomed those who were rejected by the religious establishment.

He did not establish a religious bureaucracy whose leaders could determine which relatives were still worthy of ordinary family affection.

Romans 12:18 says:

If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.

Notice the breadth of that instruction. Christians are encouraged to pursue peace. They are not instructed to manufacture estrangement whenever someone leaves their congregation.

Of course, there are legitimate circumstances in which people must establish boundaries, including situations involving abuse, manipulation, or serious wrongdoing. No one should be required to remain in an unsafe relationship. But that is an entirely different matter from demanding that people reject relatives simply because those relatives no longer subscribe to an organization's doctrines.

The PCG needs to explain that distinction honestly.

The Trumpet Brief invokes Matthew 10:34-37, where Jesus speaks about divisions within households resulting from allegiance to Him. This passage is frequently abused by religious organizations that want to convince members that opposition from family members proves they are following God.

But notice what Jesus actually says. He is describing the division that can result when people choose to follow Him despite opposition.

He is not instructing His followers to manufacture division. He is not telling religious leaders to order members to abandon relatives. He is not authorizing churches to use family relationships as weapons against those who leave.

There is a tremendous difference between accepting that one's religious convictions may cause disagreement within a family and deliberately creating family separation as an organizational policy.

One is a consequence that may occur. The other is something religious authorities actively promote.

The PCG appears remarkably comfortable confusing the two.

Now let's return to the original Trumpet Brief article.

Its author spends considerable time condemning modern family estrangement. We are told that modern society has become selfish, narcissistic, intolerant, and increasingly willing to discard family relationships. We are told that people should stop treating relatives as disposable. We are told that family loyalty is a precious part of God's design. All wonderful sentiments.

But perhaps the author should have spent a few additional paragraphs examining the PCG's own practices. Because the organization is essentially saying:

Don't abandon your family because of disagreements, politics, personal convictions, or differences of opinion. That's selfish and destructive. However, if your relatives abandon our religious organization, you may be expected to cut them off. That's biblical!

Seriously?

Can anyone explain why the emotional devastation of family estrangement suddenly becomes acceptable when the organization itself is responsible for promoting it? Why is a parent who distances themselves from an adult child because of political differences condemned, while a parent who distances themselves from a child because that child leaves the PCG is supposedly demonstrating spiritual obedience? Why is one form of estrangement described as narcissistic, while the other is elevated into a religious virtue?

The answer appears embarrassingly simple.

The PCG believes its own religious authority provides an exemption from the standards it applies to everyone else. That is not moral consistency. It is institutional self-interest dressed up as biblical interpretation.

Perhaps the most important people missing from the Trumpet Brief's discussion are those who have actually experienced the consequences of this teaching. Consider the young adult who decides that PCG teachings are no longer convincing. Perhaps they simply want to attend another Christian congregation. Perhaps they have discovered serious problems with the organization. Perhaps they no longer believe Gerald Flurry is God's end-time apostle. Whatever the reason, they make a decision to leave.

What happens next? Do their parents continue loving them? Can they visit their family?

Can they celebrate birthdays, holidays, weddings, and ordinary family occasions together? Can they call their mother or father simply because they miss them? Or must every interaction be evaluated through the organization's interpretation of spiritual separation?

Imagine the emotional burden placed upon someone who discovers that leaving a church may also mean losing the ordinary affection and companionship of family members. And consider the parents. Imagine being told that maintaining a loving relationship with your own child is somehow a betrayal of God. Imagine being pressured to choose between your child and your religious organization.

That is not a minor doctrinal disagreement. It is a profound intrusion into the most intimate relationships human beings have.

Former members of high-control religious organizations have described the devastating effects of shunning and family separation. In some cases, the resulting isolation and emotional distress have been associated with severe mental-health crises and reports of suicide. These experiences deserve compassion, serious attention, and responsible documentation.

An organization that promotes practices capable of inflicting such damage should not be congratulating itself for its supposed defense of family values.

It should be examining the consequences of its own teachings.

Here is something the PCG desperately needs to understand:

• Your family does not belong to Gerald Flurry.
• Your children are not the property of the Philadelphia Church of God.
• Your marriage is not an organizational asset.
• Your parents do not become disposable because they disagree with a religious leader.
• And your brother or sister does not suddenly lose their humanity because they decide that the PCG is not where they belong.
• Religious organizations have no legitimate claim to ownership of family relationships.

They may teach their doctrines. They may explain their interpretation of Scripture. Members are free to accept or reject those teachings. But when a religious organization attempts to dictate who its members may love, associate with, or maintain family relationships with, it has crossed a very dangerous boundary. And when it wraps that interference in the language of divine authority, the danger becomes even greater.

People can leave a church without abandoning God. People can reject Gerald Flurry without rejecting Jesus Christ. People can walk away from Armstrongism without abandoning Christianity.

And people who leave the PCG deserve the same dignity, compassion, and ordinary human affection they had before they walked out the door.

The Philadelphia Church of God wants to present itself as a defender of traditional family values while simultaneously defending a doctrine that can tear families apart. It wants to condemn the modern epidemic of estrangement while excusing its own brand of religiously prescribed estrangement. It wants to lecture the world about love, loyalty, and family responsibility while demanding that its members potentially sacrifice those very relationships on the altar of organizational obedience. And it wants everyone to believe that this is somehow God's plan.

Sorry, Gerald. The New Covenant does not work that way.

Jesus did not command Christians to make family affection conditional upon membership in a particular church. Paul did not establish the Philadelphia Church of God as the final authority over family relationships. And nowhere did Jesus instruct His disciples to abandon their children, parents, or spouses simply because they stopped attending a particular congregation.

The defining characteristic of Christianity is love.

Not fear.

Not coercion.

Not religious isolation.

Not the destruction of family relationships to protect an organization's authority.

The PCG should read 1 Corinthians 13 again, particularly the description of love as patient, kind, and not self-seeking.

Perhaps it should also spend some time with Galatians 5:22-23, where Paul identifies the fruit of the Spirit as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.

There is no fruit of the Spirit called institutional shunning.

There is no fruit of the Spirit called abandon your children for Gerald Flurry.

And there is certainly no New Covenant commandment that says:

Thou shalt destroy thy family relationships whenever somebody leaves the Philadelphia Church of God.

That commandment exists only in the peculiar theological imagination of Armstrongism.

If the PCG genuinely believes that family is sacred, perhaps it should start by allowing families to remain families, even when somebody decides to leave Gerald Flurry's religious empire.

Because a church that demands the destruction of family relationships in order to preserve its own authority has a rather serious problem with understanding what Christianity is supposed to be about.

The question isn't whether people who leave the PCG are worthy of love. The question is why an organization claiming to represent Jesus Christ would ever encourage its members to withhold it.

Silent Pilgrim

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

Good morning,

More than a quarter of American adults are estranged from a relative, according to a national survey by Cornell sociologist Karl Pillemer. In her new book, No Contact(summarized in this American Spectator piece from yesterday), Noelle Mering of the Ethics and Public Policy Center argues that much of this is the result of a toxic ideology.

Mering identifies five factors causing this breakdown. They all grow from a new idea of what it means to be human, built on “two opposing principles: the exaltation of autonomy and the incentivization of victimhood.” Each takes something God designed to bind families together and turns it into a reason to walk away.The family is demoted: The ideology recasts God’s command to honor father and mother as an unjust special loyalty that exists only to hide abuse and protect power. Better to prioritize yourself.

Disagreement becomes contamination. The ideology emphasizes identity politics, judging a person not by his character but by his political tribe. Combine that with intolerance for differing convictions, and a young progressive concludes that a conservative parent is not just wrong but morally unclean.

Everything is trauma. Whereas trauma once applied only to victims of war or abuse, now it applies to a 12-year-old told to do laundry. Many of the estranged parents Mering spoke with had made mistakes—but ordinary ones, the kind earlier generations dealt with and forgave. Therapists and social media influencers teach young adults to search their pasts for trauma until they find it.

The child is always right. Influencers with this ideology prod and coach people on breaking away from members of their family. When a parent objects, that is presented as proof of toxicity. Online, estranged parents are mocked while estranged children are applauded.
Narcissism is everywhere. Mering points to data showing self-focus rising and empathy falling over decades, with the sharpest shift among the young. Self-preoccupation tends to make a person less agreeable, yet this ideology promotes such “self-actualization.”

The parents taught the lesson first. Decades of casual divorce taught children that family members are replaceable. Mering asks how a culture that shrugs at divorce can condemn young people for “divorcing” their parents.

Critics of the Trumpet’s sponsor organization might say this sounds familiar. The Philadelphia Church of God does instruct members to cut off contact with family members who turn away from God, a doctrine Gerald Flurry explains at length in Chapter 8 of The Father’s Love. That deserves a direct answer.

The difference is who sets the standard.The no-contact movement makes the self the judge: my feelings, my politics, my peace.

Biblical separation (e.g. Romans 16:17; 1 Corinthians 5:11; 2 Thessalonians 3:6; 1 Timothy 6:5; Titus 3:10-11; 2 John 10-11) makes God the judge, and it cuts against the self. No one obeys it for comfort. It is painful, and it is perhaps the most criticized doctrine the Church holds.

Its goal is not a break but a return: “that he may be ashamed” and repent (2 Thessalonians 3:14). When a disfellowshiped man in Corinth repented, Paul told the congregation to forgive and comfort him (2 Corinthians 2:6-8). The door stays open for the prodigal son.

Christ foresaw households divided over God’s truth (Matthew 10:34-37). Today’s America divides families over the self.

The Apostle Paul saw it coming. He prophesied that “in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves … disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection …” (2 Timothy 3:1-3).Notice what came first: self-love. That prophecy, written nearly 2,000 years ago, foretells exactly what Mering has diagnosed.

Modern secularist progressivism says: shift blame, love self, hate family. That exposes its satanic origins. It is antithetical to God, who says: take responsibility, master self, love family. The reason family is under such vicious attack in Satan’s world is that it is at the heart of God’s beautiful plan for human beings.

Edmond Oklahoma: A warning report for Armstrong Auditorium patrons, donors, performers, and community partners.

 

Dan Moffett

A warning report for Armstrong Auditorium patrons, donors, performers, and community partners.

Before You Support the Philadelphia Church of God (PCG)

The report includes 15 sources, the organization’s published defenses, and ten questions for patrons, donors and sponsors.

Its strongest findings are:

• Family cutoff is explicitly defended today. An October 16, 2026 Trumpet article acknowledges instructing members to sever contact with certain family members. Gerald Flurry’s current book also presents this separation as religious obedience. theTrumpet.com
• The auditorium’s PCG connection is documented. The foundation identifies PCG as its sponsor and describes Armstrong Auditorium as the church’s auditorium. Armstrong International Cultural Foundation
• Financial and medical teachings warrant scrutiny. Published teachings connect tithing, health and spiritual standing. Medical help is permitted in some passages, while reliance on it is framed in terms of insufficient faith. The report examines that tension. Philadelphia Church of God
• A specific prophetic claim failed. Flurry’s January 2021 prediction that Trump would remain president contradicted the election outcome and subsequent Biden presidency. theTrumpet.com

The suicide section treats the bereaved father’s published testimony seriously while clearly explaining that it does not establish a verified finding that PCG caused his daughter’s death. That distinction makes the warning more credible and defensible. exitsupportnetwork.com

A warning report for Armstrong Auditorium patrons, donors, performers, and community partners

Research date: October 30, 2026

People considering support for Armstrong Auditorium have substantial reasons to investigate the Philadelphia Church of God (PCG). The clearest documented concern is a policy requiring members to cut off contact with certain family members—a policy defended in the organization’s own current publications.

Other concerns involve concentrated religious authority, financial pressure, teachings about medical care, and accountability for prophetic predictions.

This report distinguishes the PCG’s published statements, outside reporting, personal testimony, and conclusions drawn from that evidence. No interviews were conducted or response solicited from PCG leadership; its published explanations are included.

1. Armstrong Auditorium’s connection to the PCG

The connection is openly acknowledged by the organization.

The Armstrong International Cultural Foundation states that the Philadelphia Church of God sponsors both the foundation and Herbert W. Armstrong College. It describes performances at Armstrong Auditorium as taking place at the church’s auditorium. The auditorium’s FAQ also identifies the PCG among the organizations using the building. armstrong.foundation

Consequently, purchasing tickets supports a cultural operation within the PCG’s institutional network. Sponsorships and public endorsements can also help that operation gain visibility and community acceptance.

That does not establish that every ticket dollar is transferred to church ministry, or that every audience member endorses PCG doctrine. This research did not establish how ticket revenue, concert expenses, or any surplus are allocated.

The warning for patrons is straightforward: investigate the organization behind the venue before providing money or public endorsement. The quality of its performances cannot answer questions about its treatment of members and their families.

2. The Flurry family’s central leadership roles

Gerald Flurry’s official biography identifies him as the PCG’s pastor general, Herbert W. Armstrong College’s chancellor, and chairman of the Armstrong International Cultural Foundation.

Stephen Flurry’s official biography identifies him as a PCG evangelist, college president, executive editor of the Philadelphia Trumpet, and vice president of the foundation’s biblical archaeology projects. It identifies Gerald as his father. pcg.church

These overlapping positions establish that father and son occupy central roles across the religious, educational, publishing, and cultural network.

Family leadership alone does not prove misconduct or personal ownership of nonprofit assets. It does, however, make independent accountability an important question.

Supporters should ask:

• Who can independently investigate complaints about senior leaders?
• Who reviews decisions involving their relatives?
• Can members challenge leadership without risking their standing or relationships?
• Is an appeal heard outside the same chain of authority being challenged?

An adequate answer should identify an actual process and meaningful protection against retaliation.

3. Family cutoff is a current, acknowledged teaching

The most consequential evidence comes from the organization itself.

In an October 16, 2026 Trumpet article, “Honor Thy Father—Unless He Votes Wrong,” Joel Hilliker acknowledged that PCG instructs members to cut off contact with family members it considers to have turned away from God.

The article defends the practice as biblical separation rather than secular estrangement. It argues that the standard comes from Scripture and that separation seeks repentance and return. www.thetrumpet.com

Gerald Flurry’s 2026 book The Father’s Love, chapter 8, also defends family cutoff. It presents the practice as obedience, puts protection of the spiritual family above the desire to maintain certain family relationships, and acknowledges that unwillingness to follow this requirement has contributed to members leaving. www.thetrumpet.com

This concern cannot reasonably be dismissed as merely an accusation by disgruntled former members. The organization currently publishes its own defense of the policy.

The central ethical problem is the use of family relationships as a consequence of religious conformity. Someone considering departure may face a choice between freedom of conscience and continuing contact with loved ones.

That creates a powerful means of control even when a person remains physically free to leave.

This should be distinguished from an individual choosing distance from someone abusive or unsafe. The concern here is separation imposed on religious grounds.

4. Historical reporting raises serious questions about marriages

Dixon Cartwright’s report in The Journal: News of the Churches of God, issue 106, described a December 2005 sermon clarifying PCG’s separation policy.

According to that report, the policy extended to immediate relatives who were former members or classified as “Laodicean,” with qualifications involving spouses and unbaptized or supposedly invalidly baptized children.

The report said a marriage could continue when the non-PCG spouse was willing to live peacefully, while hostility or contention could justify separation. Questions could be referred through regional leadership to Gerald Flurry. www.thejournal.org

Those qualifications matter. The evidence does not support saying that every member must divorce a nonmember spouse or avoid every person outside PCG.

Nevertheless, the reported standards raise a serious question: Can reasonable disagreement with church leadership be treated as hostility?

If so, a spouse may feel pressure to remain silent to preserve the marriage. A religious organization should explain clearly how disagreement differs from conduct that genuinely threatens a spouse’s safety or well-being.

Supporters should request the current written policy rather than relying on assurances that the organization values families.

5. Suicide: a bereaved father’s testimony

Exit & Support Network publishes correspondence from Dan De Gennaro concerning his daughter Janet Privratsky’s death in 2014.

In an August 15 letter, he stated that a medical examiner’s certificate confirmed suicide. He also said he intended to explain the danger of PCG’s family cutoff policy. The page includes additional contributors’ allegations and accounts. exitsupportnetwork.com

This is a named bereaved parent’s published testimony, hosted by a critical support organization. It deserves serious attention.

However, this review did not examine the underlying death certificate, investigative file, or clinical records. Anonymous statements on the same page do not independently verify the circumstances.

The evidence supports saying:

A bereaved father publicly raised concerns about PCG’s family cutoff policy following his daughter’s death by suicide.

It does not establish that PCG was legally or clinically determined to have caused the death, that one factor explains it, or that members have a demonstrated elevated suicide rate. No reliable PCG-wide rate was established in this research.

That distinction does not diminish the family’s grief. It keeps the warning grounded in what can be supported.

Supporters can demand safeguards against isolation and severe distress without claiming that an investigation has established causation.

6. Spiritual authority and the freedom to disagree

In “God’s Family Government,” Gerald Flurry describes the church’s government as a divine family arrangement.

The same article says his office is open to complaints about harsh or dictatorial ministers and presents leaders as servants. Those statements are relevant and should be included in any fair assessment. pcg.church 

This statement by Flurry is untrue. He does not maintain an open door policy for complaints. According to ex members.

An invitation to appeal can be valuable. But appealing to the highest religious authority within an organization differs from obtaining an independent review of that authority.

The concern becomes especially serious when contested policies are presented as Yahweh’s commands. Members may experience disagreement with leaders as disobedience to Yahweh, even when the disagreement concerns a human interpretation or administrative decision.

The practical tests are:

• Can a member question a policy openly?
• Can a complaint be investigated outside the leadership structure involved?
• Can a person leave peacefully while maintaining ordinary family contact?
• Can someone seek outside advice without religious penalties?

The freedom to join should be accompanied by a meaningful freedom to leave.

7. Financial teaching can create spiritual pressure

Dennis Leap’s PCG article “A Review of Tithing” teaches multiple obligations: support for the religious work, a second tithe saved for festival attendance, and a third tithe during the third and sixth years of a seven-year cycle.

The article links financial and physical well-being with obedience, asks whether ill health may relate to failure in tithing, and warns about neglecting tithes and missing a future reward. pcg.church

An important distinction: the festival tithe is described as money saved for personal festival use, not simply another payment to headquarters. However members are required to send in 10% of the second title to the church. pcg.church

Religious giving alone does not establish exploitation. The concern is pressure created when giving is tied to divine approval, healing, or ultimate reward.

Members should be able to raise questions about hardship and expenditure without being treated as spiritually deficient.

This report does not assert a verified current debt total, embezzlement, personal enrichment, or a measured membership decline.

Donors should request audited financial information, related-party disclosures, board information, and an explanation of how cultural revenues are used. Figures belonging to similarly named organizations should never be substituted for PCG’s accounts.

8. Medical teaching contains an important tension

Carl Hilliker’s “Forget Not All His Benefits” links healing with faith and obedience, contrasts reliance on medical help with reliance on divine promises, and repeats Herbert W. Armstrong’s assertion that medicines cannot heal. It also connects faith in physical healing with spiritual salvation. pcg.church

However, Stephen Flurry’s “We Are What We Eat” reproduces Armstrong’s qualification that he was not telling people never to visit a doctor and would not advise someone against the help available to them. pcg.church

It would therefore overstate these sources to claim a universal PCG prohibition on doctors.

The concern is the pressure within the qualification: medical treatment can be permitted while being framed as a response to insufficient faith.

Supporters should ask whether members can obtain medical and mental health care without shame, whether ministerial permission is expected, and what protections exist for children and dependent adults.

This review did not establish how consistently these older published teachings are applied today or verify a specific treatment denial.

9. Prophetic claims should be tested against their actual wording

Gerald Flurry’s January 2021 Trumpet cover story was titled “Why Donald Trump Will Remain America’s President.”

The article rejected the prospect of a Biden presidency and presented that conclusion as grounded in Bible prophecy. The National Archives records Biden’s 2020 victory, with 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232. www.thetrumpet.com

The prediction about remaining president through that transition did not match the outcome.

Trump’s later return following the 2024 election does not erase the intervening Biden presidency. prod.millercenter.org

A religious leader should be accountable for the specific claim made at the time. If later events are presented as vindication, readers should compare the original wording and timeline with the later explanation.

This report does not attempt a comprehensive list of alleged failed prophecies. A documented example is more useful than a long list whose wording and dates have not been checked.

The concern is reliability when human interpretation is presented with divine certainty.

10. Assess conduct, not merely the label “cult”

Critics use “cult” as a warning, but the word is not a substitute for evidence. This report does not use it as a legal or clinical finding.

The strongest warning identifies practices that readers can examine:

• Religious requirements to sever family relationships.
• The personal cost of leaving.
• Leadership accountability.
• Pressure surrounding money.
• Freedom to seek outside advice and care.
• Responses to incorrect prophetic predictions.

Sabbath observance, biblical festivals, distinctive names for the Father and Son, or disagreement with mainstream doctrine do not themselves establish abuse.

The ethical issue is how people are treated and whether they retain meaningful freedom of conscience.

The documented family cutoff teaching provides a substantial basis for concern about high control.

11. Questions supporters should put to the organization

Before providing sponsorship, donations, or public endorsement, request clear written answers:

1. Can a baptized member leave PCG and retain normal contact with parents, adult children, and siblings who remain?
2. What conduct triggers family cutoff, who decides, and what independent appeal exists?
3. Does disagreement with a minister count as hostility, division, or apostasy?
4. Can a spouse decline church involvement without pressure to separate?
5. Can members obtain medical and mental health care without permission or adverse religious judgment?
6. What safeguards protect people reporting distress, misconduct, or financial hardship?
7. Who independently investigates allegations involving senior leaders or their relatives?
8. What audited financial information is available, and how are cultural revenues allocated?
9. How are incorrect prophetic predictions acknowledged and corrected?
10. Will PCG publish its current family contact policy in language prospective members and patrons can readily understand?

These are requests for accountability. They are not declarations that an unverified offense has occurred.

A refusal to answer is a reason to withhold confidence, rather than proof of a particular allegation.

12. A warning supporters can act on

Armstrong Auditorium is part of a religious and cultural network whose current publications defend cutting off family relationships. That fact warrants scrutiny before financial support or public endorsement.

Patrons and donors can pause support while seeking satisfactory answers, read the organization’s own explanations, and listen carefully to named former members and affected relatives.

Those wishing to support the arts can choose organizations whose policies better match their values.

Criticism should focus on leadership, policies, and evidence. Ordinary members may themselves be navigating fear, dependency, and painful choices. Treating them with dignity is consistent with demanding accountability from those who lead them.

13. Biblical principles for evaluating religious leadership

For readers seeking to obey Yahweh and follow Yeshua, these passages provide principles for examination. They do not independently establish the historical allegations above.

• 1 Peter 5:2–3: Shepherds should serve willingly and avoid domination.
• 2 Corinthians 1:24: Spiritual service does not confer ownership of another person’s faith.
• Acts 17:11: Religious teaching should be examined against Scripture.
• 1 Thessalonians 5:21: Test what is taught and retain what is good.
• Mark 7:9–13: Religious claims must not become a means of evading responsibilities to parents.
• 2 Thessalonians 3:14–15: Discipline must be considered alongside the instruction to treat someone as a brother rather than an enemy.
• 2 Corinthians 2:6–8: Correction must account for comfort, forgiveness, and the danger of overwhelming sorrow.
• Matthew 7:15–20: Teachers should be evaluated by their fruits.

Claims to represent God do not place human leaders beyond examination.

Sources

The report draws on these sources, including primary PCG publications and separately identified reporting and testimony:

1. Armstrong International Cultural Foundation: Philadelphia Church of God
2. Armstrong Auditorium: FAQ
3. PCG: Gerald Flurry biography
4. PCG: Stephen Flurry biography
5. Joel Hilliker: “Honor Thy Father—Unless He Votes Wrong,” October 16, 2026
6. Gerald Flurry: The Father’s Love, chapter 8
7. The Journal: “PCG clarifies disfellowship policy,” part 1
8. Exit & Support Network: Letters concerning PCG, 2014
9. Gerald Flurry: “God’s Family Government”
10. Dennis Leap: “A Review of Tithing”
11. Carl Hilliker: “Forget Not All His Benefits”
12. Stephen Flurry: “We Are What We Eat”
13. Gerald Flurry: “Why Donald Trump Will Remain America’s President”
14. National Archives: 2020 Electoral College Results
15. University of Virginia Miller Center: Trump’s life between presidencies

My own personal experience with this evil cult. 

I have 2 children that haven't been allowed to contact me for 14 years now.  And grandchildren I have never been allowed to see or talk to

TELL MY CHILDREN I LOVE THEM

Click Here For The Post, "THE EVIL CHURCH"