Rod Meredith sent out a note to all his minsters and elders in May about their "new" understanding on the "marriage supper with the Lamb." One of the first things you notice in Rod's mssive is how he places himself on the same level of understanding as HWA. Apparenelty only HWA and Rod are the only inspired Church of God leaders who have ever preached the "truth."
Even more disturbing is the concept that Rod is trying to enforce on his members. The great apostasy that so many love to equate to WCG's rejection of HWA's theology is miniscule to what is still to come. 99% of the world will fall into apostasy while the remaining 1% of the elite of Armstrongism will be dining with
Rod wrote:
Please help them think through these “upgrades” in our understanding of the Wedding Supper, of the timeline of final events and also the great apostasy. This is a vital challenge for all of you, and I hope that you can be alert to anyone’s misunderstanding and help them—or help your local elder to work with them to come to understanding on these basic issues and help them realize that these changes are, in fact, simply “updates” of our understanding. As you know, we have always said—at least I have—that “someday” we would get the chance to go to heaven to see our Father even before the end of the Millennium. But we have not nailed it down and given the details of all of this—as Mr. Ames has done in recent months. We have always indicated—at least Mr. Armstrong, and I—that the apostasy would be much broader than just the falling away of a few people in the Worldwide Church. As I indicated at the conference, over 99% of the world never even heard about the Worldwide Church and certainly nothing about that falling away. So the really huge apostasy is still ahead of us—as we have explained—and will affect billions of human beings before it is all over!
32 comments:
I've always felt it was a bit unfair of a Deity to speak through a book written by loons who many times contradicted each other and seemed to make it up as they go.
For something that we all have to absolutely get right the first time or burn forever in hell or be annihilated in the lake of fire, the Deity would had more real success by just showing up, have some seminars and nice lunch, and cutting out all the middle men.
Rod Meredith recently wrote me begging me no to give up and that it was no pitch to come to LCG.
In fact, here it is...
" I sincerely hope that all is going well with you, Dennis, and as one of my former students I do think about you as well as the many others who have “dropped away” from being a direct part of the Work. As the specific prophecies we have preached about for so many decades now begin to come to pass big time, I hope you will reconsider whether or not there are is a real God and whether He has a true Work on this earth today. As you know, I heard Mr. Armstrong personally declare that the “sea gates” given to America and Britain would mostly be taken away in years to come. He declared this in meetings he had in Great Britain back in 1954. Then, after being married to Margie, I was sent back to Britain in 1956 and almost immediately the Suez Canal was “taken away” from Britain followed by the removal of the Bab el Mandeb at the southern entrance to the Red Sea, the Simonstown Base controlling the tip around South Africa, the Malacca Straits, the Panama Canal, etc. Also, Britain used to control the Strait of Hormuz—which is very much in the news today and very important in world affairs. Now, only two of these major sea gates are left—Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands. Both of these are “under assault” verbally or otherwise. So it just seems a matter of time until they too are taken away. Then, here will be none. So these events as well as many, many others specific things involving major nations and major events are being fulfilled—just as Mr. Armstrong proclaimed and as I have continued to proclaim for about 60 years."
He, as all that follow are stuck in the 50's through the 70's it seems.
"As you said, I have my own experience with WCG and that has left me skeptical of many things. However, Dennis, for your sake, please back off and try to see the “Big Picture” and realize that God is intervening just as He said—and that—in spite of human nature and human failings—He has always had and does now have faithful servants who will proclaim the Truth and do the Work.
"I say all the above not to “recruit” you—for you may choose to go to United Church or elsewhere if God calls you back to the Truth. But I do have concern for the hundreds of people I taught, and hope that God will guide your life to come fully into His will before the end of this age. Thanks again for your help and concern."
I take his note as very sincere yet , of course, there is nothing in it recommended that I care to do or be. I have progressed to far, in my view, away from what seemed true to that which now seems untrue. My story and my problem.
It reminds me of the opening scene in "Little Big Man." Grandfather had died and was placed on the raised platform of trees etc for his body to be eaten by the birds. However, after everyone had left, he woke up and before falling off the scaffold int a bear pit, said..."Grandfather...is this some kind of joke...?"
I have adopted that line to define my own experienced and laughed about that opening scene ever since.
It's mostly all made up by the priestcraft, attributed to a God and tweeked along the way as needed.
Yes, Dennis, I have always felt the same way. Why all the middle men?
It isn't fair for god to inspire men to write the bible, appoint apostles to tell everyone what it's supposed to mean, and at the same time tell us not to put our faith in men, but to trust only in god himself. But the problem is, if god is going to go about it like that, then it means you have to put your complete faith and trust in the writers and your local neighborhood apostle first, before you even have the opportunity to have faith in god.
When there are numerous other religions out there too, complete with their own "divinely inspired" holy book, many of which believe they alone have it right and the rest of the world has got it wrong, there are some pretty huge and sweeping assumptions that you are not allowed to doubt or question. To never wonder if you are lucky enough to have stumbled across the one and only true religion and never question whether or not you are being fed lies and garbage about god by the writers and apostles of your particular religion is an enormous leap of faith, and that faith is in the middle men. Only after that leap of faith can you then begin to have faith in the god that they told you about.
It is interesting that every single god that people believe in today uses the exact same middle man strategy. Why is such an unreliable method of dispersing sacred knowledge of the divine so popular among the gods? Is it because the one true god chose this strategy and all the false gods simply counterfeited him? Or is it because all the gods are equally false? At this late date, the water is so muddy that it is impossible to be 100% sure. Why doesn't god sort out this mess giving people an opportunity to make a real decision? According to all the middle men, he will eventually, but only when the time for making decisions is over! So religion is like roulette: hurry up and place your soul on the right number before the world stops turning. If you guess wrong, too bad, you lose.
Having lost faith in all the men, and in all their writings and all their preaching, my bet is that there is no right number. I'm guessing the payoffs for all bets and all abstaining from betting will be equal.
"It’s an incredible con job when you think about it, to believe something now in exchange for something after death." — Gloria Steinem
Dennis:
You are very much like my wife. She too threw everything out, believing that God could not be a part of this because of the sins and evils of the ministry, especially those committed by HWA and GTA.
Me on the other hand, believe what I read in the Bible. If something is not clear, I dig deeply into the languages and customs. I'm not afraid of any so-called minister or what they say.
I left in 1990 after 14 years. Today I see that the Armstongs had many errors, and this isn't even speaking about prophecy. Doctrinally they had the Holy Days, but like a bunch of children they were keeping them on the wrong days. They never 'grew up' over the years, thinking most likely that people would leave since they (ministry) could not be seen to be wrong. The biggest problem that they had and which did them in, and is continuing to do ALL of the rest in, is TITHES.
Tithes and all the problems it brings has cursed them because they are not rightly entitled to it. Greed and God's government, which isn't really God's government, but Satan's government, has all the splits fighting themselves in order to rob followers of other organizations.
The truth of the matter is that they are the one's stealing not only from God, but the sheep whom they claim to be lead. Any serious study of tithing would show that it was one tithe for three uses. The priests only received one percent of the food and animal tithe, and not ten. The sheep were encouraged to GIVE, not to TITHE.
Moving along, HWA was called by God and used by God to proclaim His Word, and only His Word. But HWA played and the fool and showed himself for what he truly was, and what he really wanted. He wanted frame, money, and prestige.
You can read all about it. Send me a personal email at the following address and I'll show you what God really thought of this man. Any man who knew would immediately repent and stop trying to be another HWA.
You can get me at:
whiteknight777@primus.ca
I do agree with one point and only one point that RM wrote, and I mentioned it to you before, Stand back and you will see not only the big picture, but also the true one.
This I'll provide to you free of charge and no obligation.
Take care friend!
John
He, as all that follow are stuck in the 50's through the 70's it seems.
Now is that the 1850's through the 1870's.
It's hard to make it out from context.
It says alot that the most important servant (in Rod's eyes) of the True God of the Universe in this present day can only offer, as proof of his gods existence, examples of modern shipping lanes being traded back and forth between modern nations. That is all poor Rod has.
Paul R
Man I can't stand that phrase, "the Truth" and the fact he capitalizes it just makes it worse.
Just by using that terminology when speaking to you is saying that we all know it's "the Truth" but you chose to rebel against it, but it's okay, god could still call you back. If he were respectful, he would assume that you don't accept that old garbage anymore and the fact that he's insinuating that you do is kind of insulting.
He's trying to push old buttons, and trying to resurrect old programming in order to grab ahold of that hook he's hoping is still in your nose. Not trying to recruit you my ass.
I will make a few comments and hope to avoid getting embroiled in barrage of critical nonsense.
One is that my experience with what is termed Armstrongism has not been as negative as most of those here. It seems that people find this hard to believe, but reading this article about LCG and the comments made by Dennis and Andrew; I believe I can offer a reason that reflects a life that few people may relate to.
My religious experience started in my formative years with my parents belonging to an ultra-conservative sect of the Ana Baptist movement. They did not “belong to a church” they were all “Brethren” the elders and deacons had no higher rank they were offices of service. There was no paid ministry and there was a “meeting house” not a church building. The focus was on simple living and at that time we were involved in agriculturally related occupations. The men would sit around on Sunday discussion the bible.
Later in life I remember an old gent (who wasn’t of the Brethren) telling me he was raised on “spute”. I ask him what he meant, he said his father was a Russellite (Jehovah’s Wittness) and his Grandfather was a Campbellite (Disciples of Christ) and they were always “sputing” the bible. I told him I could relate to that.
When I was in my late 20’s starting a family I felt a needed to pass that legacy on to my children, but do to a variety of circumstance (my wife was raised oneness Pentecostal) we chose Radio Church of God, which at that time appeared to be “different” due to more favorable characteristics than those that have surfaced over the years.
My wife and I dedicated our life to God, not Herbert Armstrong. I remember an article by Richard Armstrong that stated “You are not and Armsrongite”. I guess that died with him. I never stopped reading books revealing the development religion and church history. My studies revealed the bible as made up many narrations by many authors. These have been chosen as “inspired” on judgment of people involved in the propagation of Christianity. I know this are not new to others here, but realistically things like this can shake peoples faith.
My personal conviction is that there is no one visible “true church” and God is working with an invisible “church”; if He thinks like human beings want him to think (which I would question). The one thing that I will not alter is the belief that man’s existence is due to an intelligence that has the power to create. Right or wrong that is the best option.
This belief causes me to reject the idea that man will by his own freewill get better and better, when I look at my garden can readily see that without my continual work the weeds would come out winners. This is a strong indication that evil would eventually make good extinct if there is not a higher power in control. But I will not spend time “sputing” it.
I do not know what “new truth” Rod Meredith has, but it is probably something that was discussed and decided in the first or second century or it has of no significant to how we live today.
Mr. Nobody
So, what is Uncle Roddy saying here? Is he finally admitting that the incredible numbers of mainstream Christians around the world are actually Christians, and that they will be the ones to apostasize? Or is he saying that billions of people will convert to Armstrongism within the short time he believes we have left, and that those will fall away?
I believe the ACOG people are just barely hanging on, grasping at any withering blade of grass that would substantiate the false teachings which they wasted their lives believing.
Even though I left when the sham and scam became obvious in 1975, I really wish I'd given this incredible pile of horsecrap even less power over my life than I did.
I can't imagine the mental and spiritual conditions of those who spent thirty, forty, and fifty years being jacked around by this stuff.
Who would have thought way back in the day that we'd be witnessing such a meltdown as read about here on a daily basis?
BB
"You are very much like my wife. She too threw everything out, believing that God could not be a part of this because of the sins and evils of the ministry, especially those committed by HWA and GTA."
No,that was not the reason at all and it had little to do with the problems in the church with people, ministers or whatever. I simply realized the story, the Book and the history of the Bible was nothing in reality as taught by most churches. I lost faith in faith opted for facts. Faith is we have before we get the facts.
I have doubt, had I gone to the other seminary I had been accepted to in NY instead of WCG, I would have had a very similar awakening to the real origins of the bible, who actually wrote it and why, along with a blossoming love for paleontology and the real science behind the origins of everything including humans.
It's just how I think and have not changed much from when I was a kid. I got sidetracked...
"No,that was not the reason at all and it had little to do with the problems in the church with people, ministers or whatever."
Which won't matter a bit. You can explain till you are blue in the face that you had objective, logical reasons for rejecting the Bible and the God of the Bible, but you will be ignored and accused of:
1) Getting angry at God
2) Getting angry at The Church
3) Getting angry at Fellow Believers
4) 1-3, just insert "hurt and bitter" for "angry"
5) You wanted to be able to sin without feeling guilty over it.
6) Etc.
Paul R.
Completely agree with that Paul, especially #5! Everyone is conditioned to think that there are only ever 2 reasons why anyone would ever willingly leave: 1) "A root of bitterness," and 2) "I want to sin and not feel guilty."
You got sidetracked, Dennis, and so did I. In my teens, I was a skeptic and still can't figure out how I fell for HWA's baloney. A lot of Germans couldn't fathom how they fell for Hitler either. In both cases, a lot of people paid with their lives, one way or another. I feel nothing but frustrated compassion for those who just can't let the fairy tales go (I mean both the Bible and all the stupid interpretations of it).
Paul, I also get that hurt and bitter crap. It just can't be that it's based on reason and careful analysis that I became an atheist over a period of about forty years from 1975 to just a couple years ago.
First, I went to general faith in a vague god that was rather ephemeral and not too directly involved down here -- deism I guess. Then, agnosticism. Now, to the realization that it's all BS and none of the gods of the world or their holy books have any basis in reality.
I remember reading Roderick Meredith's articles in the Plain Truth back in 1962.
He's a false prophet.
He lost any right to any shred of credibility 50 years ago.
Perhaps he should just shut up and retire now to "enjoy" what little time he has left.
Byker Bob said, "So, what is Uncle Roddy saying here?"
MY COMMENT - Agreed! So what is the Rod of god saying? What are the upgrades in understanding of the wedding Supper? I'm confused!
Richard
Here's a kicker. The other day I had a student ask to talk to me. He explained to me how God , in the guise of a man, talked with him for hours......
I was pleased with myself that I just looked patiently at him and said, 'that's really interesting. Now let's get back to how to do deep tissue massage..."
Anytime I hear the word, "billions" in the context of religious talk, I get all stupefied.
It makes me either want to send the preacher a chicken from my chicken farm, or else sacrifice a chicken in Jesus's name.
The Holy Spirit Clucks!
"Mr. Nobody" is the horse's-ass Herbie-loving troll that used to post as 'Albert B.'
Anon Said:
“Mr. Nobody" is the horse's-ass Herbie-loving troll that used to post as 'Albert B.'”
I may be a horse's-ass, but I would hardly describe myself as a Herbie-loving troll. Just because I have sympathy for the people who have be been actively involved in what is termed Armstrongism does not mean I support the system. I am not a prophet, but I can make a declaration that the humpty dumpty eggshell of a system that was formed by HWA and associates can and never should be put back together again. It will never happen even if Herbert would rise from the dead as some have thought. In fact I could be as negative as anyone commenting in these articles, but that is not my nature. I do not know how many ministers (if any) check this blog so I do not if they would agree or disagree with what I say, but I was never a docile sheep nor was I a goat type of member.
One person asks the question “who I was I setting myself to be. A minister.
If I wanted to be a minister I certainly would not be commenting here. I believe I would be accepted by any one of the factions without question. I am like Ed Smith (who recently passed away) use to say “I yam what I yam you will just have to accept it”.
Who am I? I am Albert S. Boocher and I have paid my dues and graduated from Armstrongism. I have learned the lessons of life earned a very high degree in the University of HK (hard knocks). I was an “assistant deacon” at FOT (which I thought was laughable) in 1960, I was a deacon for several years and I was an elder for 25 years. I spent 6 years publishing a newsletter in a self financed ministry (ABCM) encouraging people to not give up on God when people disappoint you.
Right now I am watching, waiting, and praying in preparation for the last step in this earthly existence. People can ridicule and make all derogatory remarks they want, but I do not intend on spending a lot of time trying to tear down a system that is already dead. I do try to encourage those who are fighting to find an identity after suffering loss.
I am still just Mr. Nobody
Please overlook mistakes in a lack of editing
Albert
Ah, okay, you ARE a wol- er, I mean, a minister, or at the least were for 25 years.
No, Albert, HWA may be dead, and Armstrongism may be in decline, but that system is not dead, not yet at least. There are still several tens of thousands of victims who remain in its evil clutches via whatever magic hypnotic spell I still don't quite understand, even though I was born into that hypnosis and somehow woke up out of it.
When I hear your "don't rock the boat" message, what I hear you saying is, "Shh, don't disturb the wolves, they aren't done eating yet." Even though you spin it in terms of, "Yes, but, the sheep WANT to be eaten, and if you rock the boat, the sheep's gentle, relaxing, hypnosis might be 'disturbed,' and that might be upsetting to them."
Yes, Albert, sometimes the truth is upsetting. Sometimes people need to be disturbed. Why? Because it is in their best interests. Because that way, perhaps they will not be lunch for a wolf.
This is the story of our lives, Albert. We know what it is to be victimized, and we know what it is to be "disturbed." We are examples of sheep whose boat was rocked. Yes, it is slightly disturbing, but it's okay, and it's much better than continuing on as a victim. Don't presume you can confuse and bamboozle anyone here by retelling us our own life's story with your spin on it.
Yes, Albert, what I hear, is you speaking as a WOLF. Now that you tell me you have wolf credentials, why am I not surprised? And we, the sheep who got away, don't appreciate a wolf defending the best interests of other wolves, even though you might spin it to sound instead like it's in the best interest of sheep everywhere. Your wooly overcoat isn't fooling anyone. You speak to us just like Rod Meredith's letter to Dennis, with the smooth words of a conjurer, trying to put us under your wolfspell.
It is frankly wrong and evil for anyone to say that not "disturbing" someone is somehow a higher good than letting their victimization continue uninterrupted. IMHO, you're defending criminals, and want their victims to be left to the slaughter, rather than be "disturbed."
You say that we are the ones who don't understand, but we do. You are the one who doesn't seem to understand. This is as frank and straightforward as I can say it, without being rude or impolite. I am trying to be honest so that maybe you will understand, and maybe we really can "put this to bed." But you can't come here and argue Armstrongism is a positive force in the world, any more than you can go on a Jewish website and argue that Nazi Germany was a positive force in the world, and expect everyone to warm up to your message. I don't know why this should be so hard for you to understand.
So, if you want to come here and defend Armstrongism by saying that the perpetuation of that system is in the best interests of sheep who don't want to be "disturbed" on their way to the slaughter, you really shouldn't be too surprised if you get flamed, called a troll, and in other respects receive a slightly frosty reception from sheep who are on the lam (pun, sorry). Don't think this is happening because we don't understand. It is happening because we DO understand, all too well. We see both sides perfectly well, yours and ours, but you only seem capable of seeing your side of the larger picture.
You might chalk all this up as "a root of bitterness" as ministers usually do. You might say we have a "bad attitude" or a "rebellious spirit" because we don't give you the unearned respect to which you've become accustomed. I am sure that is probably what Adolf Eichmann said too, when he was put on trial in Jerusalem. Whatever. I'm just done with being lunch for someone like you. And I don't like to see anyone else being eaten for lunch by someone like you either, no matter how willingly they may offer themselves up.
To Andrew
What is your position on Christianity and the Christian bible?
AB
My position on Christianity and the Christian bible is that although Armstrongism's ministers have always preached all that (or at least a version thereof, a version we around here call Armstrongism), for many if not most of those ministers, it was something that applied only to the laymembers, never to the preacher. The ministry put themselves above the law. God, so they tell you, supports them even when they're wrong (thank goodness they're never wrong!) It's hard to follow what the minister preaches about Jesus' teachings AND victimize people at the same time. However, if by preaching it you can get OTHERS to follow those teachings, then it's easy to victimize them. Meanwhile, the laymember is so busy self-flagellating over every miniscule infraction, he doesn't even notice the minister has seduced his wife! Is this wrong? Doesn't matter. God supports them, even when they're sleeping with your wife. And you have to pay his salary too? Geez! Do these ministers even believe in an Christianity, and the bible? I suppose that depends upon how you define Christianity, and how you interpret the bible. Let's ask a different question: Do they believe in an afterlife in which their actions now will be judged with equity? ABSOLUTELY NOT! They believe only in the physical here and now. So they'll take your physical rewards now, which you'll agree to give them in exchange for a better reward in the hereafter. Everybody dies thinking he's the winner. It's a win-win! (So long as nobody comes back to set the record straight as to who really won.) What is my position on Christianity and the Christian bible? I suppose that depends upon whether you define Christianity and interpret the bible in ministerial terms or in laymember's terms...
To Andrew: In other words you do not have the foggiest idea what the bible is talking about or what real Christians believe.
No wonder you have problems understanding what I have posted. The only thing you seem to know is that things were not right in WCG. It is hard to communicate with that type thinking, but I will give it some thought.
AB
"In other words you do not have the foggiest idea what the bible is talking about or what real Christians believe. No wonder you have problems understanding what I have posted."
From the time I was born, I lived for 40 years as a true-blue through and through dedicated believer. I studied my bible, I prayed to God, I fasted, baptized at 20. I tried to do everything right. I was idealistic.
So, you're you going to sit there and tell me that during those 40 years I was not a real Christian, and that after 40 years of teaching and study, it garnered me not one single insight into how a REAL Christian believes? And then you're going to keep telling me that I'M the one who doesn't understand you? And then after that you're going to suggest that the reason why I don't, is because YOU'RE the very model of a REAL Christian? A REAL Christian who can't tell the difference between the victim and the abuser. A REAL Christian who can't tell the difference between right and wrong. You're going to sit there and feed me that bullshit?
Wow. you really are a troll. No more benefit of the doubt for you. You want to be a troll and play semantic games, you'll have to do it with someone else from here on out.
To Andrew and everyone else
This is just a brief note and I do not know what or if I will continue posting.
I believe the bible story is not about who has the best religion or who has the greatest idea on what to expect after we die. To me it is about the survival of the human race. Even science is concerned about this. It is about the battle between good and evil that projects that good will win when reality looks like evil is the strongest. There is no way I can communicate this in these comments unless there is a foundation built on the death of Christ on the cross.
AB
The bible story is about the survival of the human race?
Alrighty, then.
"There is no way [Mr. Albert B. Nobody] can communicate this in these comments unless there is a foundation built on the death of Christ on the cross."
Well, then, you're right; you're pissing up a rope as far as many of us are concerned.
Human sacrifice is a bizarre absurdity, even when carried out symbolically, as in Christian ritual. Apparently it is an extension of the awareness hunters and herdsmen developed that their own lives depended on ending the lives of animals they admired, or even cherished. They calmed their conflicted feelings by rationalizing that some invisible but powerful and vindictive causal agent(s) ordered them to do it.
On that base they built the idea that the more precious the animal killed, the more leniently the supernatural forces would treat them. The sacrifice must be perfect, unblemished. Some societies extended that principle to human sacrifices: a virgin daughter, as among the Incas, or a human avatar of a god, as among the Aztecs and in Christian symbolism.
Obviously, the Christian crucifixion story lies within the range of normal human behavior, but then so does throwing girls into volcanoes and beheading adultresses.
As I said before, a bizarre absurdity.
I just noticed I was skipping around among societies that sacrificed virgin girls. The Incas knocked them in the head and let them freeze to death. It is stories from Hawaii (possibly apocryphal) that tell about virgins cast into volcanoes.
Sorry. If you can forgive Mr. Albert B. Nobody for sloppy editing, maybe you can accord me the same courtesy.
Why would anybody want to come here to try to win souls for Jesus, or win souls back to Armstrongism, or whatever he wants. Been there, done that, didn't work, gave up. Why would anyone want to go back and hit their head against a wall some more? What would I accomplish this time? It would just be more of the same. Searching for god, but not finding him. Waiting on promises that are never fulfilled. Expecting an answer to prayer other than no and never getting it, ect.
Albert,
Please keep in mind that even though you've said you have "graduated from Armstrongism" it does not make it so.
Imo there's always going to be something residual from the experience.
Time and time again, I've read stuff by people who have made the same claim, and the more they are insistent on it, the more it raises red flags for me.
Typically, I notice such people accusing Armstrong cult victims who dare to be critical, of having a "root of bitterness", etc, much as you have done here.
Maybe you're only newly out, like only 5 or 10 years since you've left the wcg and any splinters, and that may account for your bitter attitude toward critics.
Some food for thought.
Anon said:
“Maybe you're only newly out, like only 5 or 10 years since you've left the wcg and any splinters, and that may account for your bitter attitude toward critics.”
My reply
I appreciate your comment. It reveals a misinterpretation of my comments. I don’t feel any bitterness regarding the critics. My motives (I’ll call them) were to point out that the bitterness and anger that seemed to be expressed may do damage to a lot of people who may have a different view of their religious association. If I thought the type of attacks I see would destroy the behavior that has been exposed here I would be whole heartedly support it, but it seems to have created a lot pseudo apostle/preachers claiming “truth”.
I felt that the way things were and are often presented would be repugnant to people drawn into a legalistic religion. I knew when the beliefs were changed there would be problems even though I understood the theological issues and recognized the historical battles that have been ongoing from the beginning of Christianity. One person mentioned that people in those groups would not be looking at this blog and that may be right. That means that most of what I felt may be harmful is simply a ventilation of hatred and bitterness or the belief it would cause people to avoid such groups.
I can see that those supporting these tactics believe they are helping free those who are still associated with one of these groups and maybe they are right. I withdrew my membership from WCG in 2000, but I stayed that long because there were people there that I was helping to make the needed adjustment to what had transpired. I have no bitterness and my spiritual life is still intact.
Albert
I don't think this website is helping free people from Armstrongism who are still embedded in it. It might be helping free those who have already decided they don't want to be embedded in it anymore.
I am not sure why I sometimes come and read this stuff, what is wrong with me? I left in 1972, and when I left I really did leave. At that time there was John Tretrek (spelling?) who was writing Ambassador Report. I knew him at college (AC of course). I used to wonder why he was wasting his life on attacking all this instead of just getting on with it. We were both young then -- early 20's, there was plenty of opportunity to get a new life. But John Tretrek had a mission I guess, then he died young of cancer. Didn't we waste enough years on them without then spending years attacking them.
Now I find myself over 40 years later reading about the old WCG -- the powers of the internet no doubt.
Plus are there some old unresolved issues floating around from my childhood in WCG or my ruined childhood family?
Or is it just curiosity? I do so understand the problems one much face if one were a ministers preaching 'the Truth' for over 20 years and then it all disintegrates. What about all those people you advised to do ridiculous things? must be a hard adjustment. Plus been the member of a higher caste like royalty. It's never too late to learn though is it.
Post a Comment