On my favorite wacky Yahoo board filled with over zealous law spitting legalists, a person posted a comment that people should watch the John Ankerberg interviews with GTA.
There are thirteen of these videos
Another person quickly piped in, "Why would anyone watch this pervert?"This comment did not sit well with a COG woman who thinks she also is a professional Jew. She had this to say:
He was never convicted of a crime.
However, there were those inside and outside the church who were criminals and had a vested interest in making sure that Garner Ted and his father were kept apart permanently and that Garner Ted's reputation was destroyed in order to take down the Church of God.
The online tapes of Garner Ted and John Ankersberg are fun. Garner Ted makes mincemeat out of the other men he debates.
Whatever he might be, he knew his bible inside out, backwards and forwards, he knew how to prove what he said too.
A great number came into the church of God through the work on Garner Ted Armstrong on television and radio.
It's funny to read her comment that GTA made mincemeat of Ankerberg. Almost all in the Christian community say that Ankerberg makes mincemeat of GTA.
The same foolishness is also claimed about GTA making mincemeat of those who believe in evolution. Evolution was GTA's big moneymaker for a while. Quick, witty, editorializing without any substantial proof, spit out to try and discredit scientists. GTA sounded impressive to the ordinary COG member who almost assuredly did not have higher education. Plus, by the fact that GTA had attended and graduated from God's College, he therefore knew what he was talking about. GTA never had a real education in a real college. He had a team of researchers who would hunt and hunt until they found someone who agreed with the stance that GTA had or the church had. They they would reword it and make it GTA's own.
Then what about glossing over GTA's rampant adultery and sexual harassment court cases. How many women did this guy need to have sex with, assault or rape before he was guilty? Two hundred? 75? Or just one?