Friday, February 12, 2016

Ian Boyne Responds and Apologizes

Below is a letter I received from Ian Boyne that he asked to be published here.  I also told him I look forward to hearing about his interpretation of Reformed Armstrongism and why it still maintains meaning for him today.

I apologize unreservedly if any offense was taken to my  comments made in the Journal. None was  ever meant. I specifically said  SOME of those who  posted  on this blog can be crude, callous and cryptic—NOT all. (Had to use my Armstrongite trademark of the caps!) I said that  because  I have read  highly insensitive, distasteful  and, indeed, crude and callous comments made about  people  who had just  died , with family and friends still in grief. My comments  concerning the reaction to Ron Dart  were  to stress that his life was so impactful and impressive, especially in an environment and context where decency, compassion and respectfulness were in very short supply, that even an anti-Church of God blog like this spared him the vitriol. I never meant to convey that all who participate  on this blog make crude and callous comments. That would be a total misrepresentation on  my part.   
My reference to “scruples” related to those who were prone to make crude statements, not to everyone here. My  overarching  point was that the respect and honor shown to Dart in his death was not due to any  tradition of not speaking evil of the dead, for I have seen that violated here, but due to genuine high regard for Dart and his non-authoritarian, non-cultic behavior and ministry.  I  check  this blog literally every day and  find many of  your comments useful and poignant. l  have written in the Journal, for example,  about my respect for Byker Bob’s insightfulness and incisiveness. I always look forward  to his contributions. He has a fine, sharp mind, with formidable analytical skills.  
You, too, Gary, are obviously a  very reflective and thoughtful person, whose stand against abuse, authoritarianism and autocracy must be commended.  As a minister in the Armstrong movement  I, naturally, disagree with  much  of what is said here, but  I do  log on every day  to see what you guys are saying and what the crazies in the movement are up to.  I am sorry that because of my busy professional and pastoral life (and heavy reading schedule—which I guess is a shock. LOL), I don’t have much time to engage.  
But I confess to being  tempted to write a piece showing why a cerebral person like me still finds some value in what I call  Reformed Armstrongism.  Perhaps  one day soon  I  might yield. In the meantime I stay tuned to your site. Thanks for  giving  me a voice and again  no offense meant.  
Ian Boyne


Anonymous said...

I am impressed by Ian! If only the Church of God movement were filled with more like him.

Miller Jones said...


Anonymous said...

Some here are either a) not capable of simple text analysis high school level b) willing to yield an inch on something positive in anything related strongarm.
I'm still not sure on a) Can't fault them on either really.

Byker Bob said...

Thanks, Ian. Basically, I feel as if some of us here function as "accountability partners" to the Armstrong movement, because we do articulate some valid constructive criticism. Many of the rank and file members get that, but it is the rare minister who would be able to see it. In the world of Fortune 500 companies, the truthfulness inherent in exit interviews is both known and valued. Most of the ACOGs would do well to embrace that tradition, even as you apparently do. We regularly express such exit interviews here.


Steve D said...

An apology? Something you will never hear from many in C of G leadership positions.
of G leaders, "Seldom correct;never in doubt."

Minimalist said...

Where can we view the complete accounting data & balance sheets of Boyne's CGI Jamaica?

I'll await the response here.

Anonymous said...

That pic of a tropical island is what drives the COG churches. A paradise for the tares, where there is no moral judgment, the converted are enslaved by the tares, and one can get away with any crime. Dream on.

Chuckles said...

Minimalist 6:35; Why do you want a complete accounting data and balance sheets, what are you trying to say, it sounds as if you are insinuating something, speak up, but only if you have a good reason or proof of something wrong, otherwise look after your own affairs.

Darren C. said...

It's not saying much for the movement if it's a compliment to have high regard for someone's "non-cultic behavior and ministry."

Ian's "Reformed Armstrongism" is no substitute for abandoning the cult of Armstrongism. It still smells of Armstrong, just as anything called "Reformed Mormonism" or "Reformed Koresh-ism" or "Reformed [E.G.] White-ism" would smell of those movements' founders. The self-attached label -- identifying with a proven false prophet -- should serve as an alarm.

Anonymous said...

The Cult of Herbert Armstrong Mafia is so rife with lies, they have lived with them so long, that any objective exposition contrary to their heavily compartmentalized sensibilities is met with anger, accompanied by irrational attacks.

This seems to be a qualified apology, which, actually, is no apology at all.

Worse, the damage is done.

We are to assume, of course, that The Journal will willingly print a sort of retraction.

Anonymous said...

"...why a cerebral person like me still finds some value in what I call Reformed Armstrongism."

and therein lies the problem....HWA is an idol to so many, it's as if he wrote the bible and created the idea of sabbath keeping, feast keeping, adherence to the 10 commandments, etc...

Minimalist said...

"Where can we view the complete accounting data & balance sheets of Boyne's CGI Jamaica?

"I'll await the response here."

Still Waiting... --but not holding out much hope

Unknown said...

Judaism , as a whole , is not considered a cult or abusive in general. Same can be said of the Church of God Seventh Day.

They keep the Sabbath, the Jews keep Holy Days, don't eat pork , don't celebrate Xmas or Easter and the like. Jews in general are expected to marry with their faith, and stay loyal to their heritage.

They are considered to be normal everyday citizens and productive contributors to society.

People in the COG therefore are not much different from Jews, although they believe in Jesus Christ. I believe that some who post here with vitriol are from about three different perspectives...

1) Those who despise belief in any God whatsoever. Thus, a COG member, no matter how enlightened or gracious they may be, are viewed with negativity and being despised.

2) Those who dislike or are resentful of the COGs general basic doctrines, but who still believe in God. The fringe doctrinal ideas and cultic practices of the COG are one thing, but to despise those basic premises that Jews still observe , and to try to apply some type of "mental illness" or lack of humanity to those who believe in the Sabbath, or unclean meats or Holy Days as great torts, are not being fair and open minded to religious difference. Again , those practices , of and by themselves are not grounds to dismiss an individual as a KOOK, no more so than it is to rag on a Jew for being a Jew.

3) Here is where we can all agree on. Religious authoritarian abuse, financial malfesiance and treachery, unaccountable leadership, Hierarchy, coverup, and whack- a- doodleness such as claiming to be a Biblical figure, or knowing secret coded prophecies and the like. In effect, being in an abusive personality cult that tries to stand between a believer and God.

Being a Jew, or being a Sabbatarian Christian does not automatically mean one is an evil, weird or a cult member. Men like Ian Boyne and Ron Dart, although many may disagree with their belief system ,are/were legitimate well balanced citizens who have avoided the pitfalls of the specific sociopathy of Armstrongism, which dysfunction laid far beyond the realms of a belief in God, or Sabbath observation.

Anonymous said...

Wow, what a spectacle!

While the hounds are unleashed, BB stands alone as the noble baron while the order has been given......

"Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius."
Beziers 1209

Or quoting commander Nasir in "Kingdom of Heaven".
"You reap what you sow."


Byker Bob said...

Just for the benefit of those who might not be into history, nck, are you saying that it is my desire or order, as noble baron, to kill everyone and let God do the sorting, and protecting?

You have seriously misjudged me.

The funny thing is, I believe the Albigensians were one of the groups that Hoeh falsely labeled as Churchofgoddians.


Anonymous said...

Re: Connie's comments @ 9:24 AM on 2/13

While the comments about Jews are basically correct, the belief that Dart was well balanced and avoided the pitfalls of the sociopathy of armstrongism is wrong.

To enjoy the benefits of tithe stealing is clearly evil. There is no evidence that I can find that Dart specifically and publicly apologized for his receiving a salary with money gained in such a way. He may have not received tithes in his last organization as he did in previous organizations, but that is irrelevant. The bottom line is that he never admitted his wrongdoing and he is entirely responsible for the job he chose to take as he was never forced to work for hwa or any other organization.

Tithing is a practice centered on the Temple. Jews clearly and obviously know that they are not bound to tithe in this day even though their religion encourages donations to worthy causes. They have been noted as benefactors for many many years. Additionally, one reason why tithes were due to the levitical priesthood comes from the fact that they were not given things such as land (e.g. on which to raise food) like the other tribes IN THE LAND ISRAEL (had to get my hwa caps in) although they were given lands where they could live.

hwa and his minions changed what the Bible says and made themselves the new receivers of tithes and in fact took tithes that the Bible specifically gives to the needy and used it for themselves. They lived in nice homes and drove nice cars... much better than evidently what most of their "flock" had. And... they did it in the USA.

Additionally, there is no evidence that Dart specifically and publicly denounced the false teachings/prophecies of the organizations which employed him. Of course, he probably would have been fired or might have lost many followers had he done so.

What the Bible says about tithes and what these cogs did/do is irreconcilable. The multitude of false teachings and prophecies is also condemned strongly in scripture as the article about hwa posted today shows. If one wants to believe otherwise, that is his choice. Yet he is still wrong and always will be wrong.

I stated this in the comments of the article which noted Dart's passing and will state it again...

Ron Dart may have been one of the better minions of hwa, but what good is that in an organization that was corrupt to the core from the beginning and has begotten more of the same?

Boyne is someone who is most likely similar to Dart given his organization and his admiration of Dart. Therefore, what is good about the fact that he has "apologized" in this article or that he may be "better" than others in the cogs? By its structure, his organization is corrupt. It matters not how nice it is or what good works it may do (assuming it actually provides physical aid to those who need it) if it is not doing what it is supposed to do according to the direction of the Creator. Its belief that it is doing what is directed is judged based on what scripture says, not what that organization thinks.

There are many groups that help others, but that does not mean that they are doing what the Bible says. An example could be a (liberal) religious organization that helps the poor, yet promotes lifestyles or funds causes that are incompatible with scripture. The Bible does not differentiate between that example and the conservative cogs who act wrongly as a matter of doctrine while doing some things correctly.

Like organizations, the Bible tells individuals how to act in all phases of life. It does not ever tell anyone that it is ok to do this, but not do that. In fact, a reason why the Messiah was so special was because He always did what is right and He and others such as Paul told believers to continue to do good and to correct wrongdoing.

Those who hang on to an organization because it has some truth or like some leader because he was good or not as bad as others are gaining nothing except the feeling that they are right. It is nothing but a feeling though.

Anonymous said...


If you would just start reading my postings for exactly what I am saying.

I was referring to you as the noble baron!
Because on this particular thread you are embracing Ian in a balanced and compassionate way. Standing by in horror like the odd ordinary wehrmacht officer observing the ss doing the slaughter in obvious discontent, or the noble barron participating for his own noble reasons in the (virtual) slaughter of the abberants, watching in digust the hounds killing the women and children of Beziers.

So no I have not misjudged you.
We are in on the same cause.
However even Connie felt compelled to counter the vitriol against a person apologizing for a mistake he had not even made. His tongue in cheek was just misread because of his associaion with strongarmism.

The fact that unwanted powers are released by vitriol and the fact that Connie felt compelled to counter this made me quote.

"You reap what you sow."

You may have observed also that I was not quoting the bible but the Islamic knight fighting the fanatic christians.

However if the particular off shoot where my babies are entangled were to be attacked I would even counter smaller and common mistakes on strongarmism for example:
-that armstrongites were ever required to hand over 30% of their income
-or that members would judge the success of an ad campaign with the increase in new members instead of with the largest audience reached. etc etc

For now, I'm only painting with broad strokes here, inviting the same criticism the modernists recieved. "We cannot see what you are painting."


Anonymous said...

"Tithing is a practice centered on the Temple."

well annon. 10:03, you clearly don't understand how the "old testament" scriptures apply to the "new testament" times....

I could go into much more detail, but obviously your mind is made up.

Byker Bob said...

Of course he does, 7:33! He has simply become aware that Armstrongite "proof" texts do not provide the correct understanding.


Anonymous said...

All the COG ministers are bad. The truth is out there now so they have no excuse. I don't care how nice they seem. Even a psychopath can be charming and have even fooled the psychologists who interviewed them personally in prison where they ended up and where Ron Dart should have been, along with HWA and GTA.

Anonymous said...

Regarding Jews, the New Testament says they (meaning their evil leaders then and today) were "contrary to all men" while "the common people heard him [Jesus] gladly". The many "antisemetic" scriptures condemning "the Jews" refer to the leaders just like people today who are anti-American say "Americans" do this or that when referring to the asinine behavior of the leaders, whom most Americans themselves despise.

Anonymous said...

Distance now testing