Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before!
With all the new crazy self-appointed Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars leading various Churches of God today, it is important to hold these agents of deception accountable.
Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web of Corrupt Leaders
Pure blasphemy all around, Christ would never touch an unclean pig! He also did not make it ok to eat filthy pigs! I should expect nothing less than this blasphemy from those that have turned their back on the truth.
1.34 PM talking of blasphemy, isn't that what the ministers are doing by hiding that Christ personally leads every Christian, with no middleman ministers. I have been reading church literature since the 1960s, and have never read an article or heard a sermon on Christ leading every individual member. Endless preaching of obey, yield, surrender, submit, but God has been pushed to one side. And by lording it over the members using verbal brutality and verbal murder (by attacking peoples self image), doesn't this amount to ministers being "god" to the church members? Teaching Armstrong worship, minister worship, church worship, isn't this blasphemy?
Neither Jesus nor his apostles ate any unclean creatures. At the worst, some Pharisees and teachers of the law once caught some of Jesus' disciples eating without first washing their hands (Matthew 15:1-2). None of them were ever accused of eating a ham sandwich, or even being seen with one.
In the vision recorded in Acts chapter 10, Peter said that he had NEVER eaten anything unclean (Acts 10:14). While Peter was wondering about the MEANING of the vision, some gentile visitors showed up, and Peter concluded that God had shown him not to call any MAN unclean (Acts 10:28) the way some Jews had done.
Many people today ignore what Peter said God had shown him, and think the vision meant that it is now okay to eat pigs (and get trichinosis), and civet cats (and get SARS), and monkeys (and get Ebola), etc.
Some people might even think that Peter was now free to eat the gentile visitors if he had wanted to. In the end, Peter even let the visitors go too after talking to them, even though cannibalism was now allowed according to some people's quick reading of the chapter.
I find it amazing how people cherry pick the laws in God's word and decide which laws are done away with and what are still in effect. There are moral, social and health laws in Leviticus that we keep and no one seems to have a problem with that. Everyone agrees that murder, incest, rape, lying cheating and stealing are wrong, but when it comes to food laws such as unclean meats people cry foul! and deem it abolished under the new covenant. Even modern day medical science has proven that the unclean meats listed in scripture should be avoided as they can cause many illnesses such as heart disease, cancer, etc. Jesus said, "if you want to enter into life keep the commandments." That includes the food laws, and the Ten Commandment as well, which also includes the Sabbath.
HWA was wrong to expropriate the identity and practices of the Jews for himself and his followers. This includes the prohibition against pork and other meats. This was stealing the Jews' cultural-religious identity. This was wrong of him to do this. This cheapened and degraded religious practices that are precious to religious Jews. This was disrespectful towards the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.
Armstrongism was never a part of Judaism so it is morally dubious that they should confuse people by adopting various Jewish practices for themselves.
It is decided long ago by the early Christians, even before the New Testament was written, that the Gentile Christians were under no obligation to observe the rituals of Judaism. That is what the argument over circumcision was about.
Galatians was written not to condemn anti-law, Gnostic, proto-Catholics as Roderick Meredith would have us believe. It was written to condemn those who said Gentile Christians needed to be circumcised.
Armstrongism's adoption of various Jewish practices is a wrong against the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.
The dietary laws God gave were simply for health reasons not a ritual. There is plenty of science to back up avoiding the foods God said were not good to eat.
Beat up the Armstrongs as much as you wish, but if you let your bitterness rule your mind, you'll miss the truths that were revealed by these flawed humans. We are all flawed.
Unfortunately, many don't understand "the story behind the story" in the Bible.
Here's an example of one such hidden story, that's only available to those with the Holy Spirit-
verse 9: And it came to pass, Jesus left Nineveh on the road to the south to wash his feet in the Tigris River,
verse 10: For the Lord's feet stunk mightily, for Chief Pharisee Herbvius Pervius did refuse to wash them.
verse 11: And a multitude met Jesus on the road, saying, "Lord, our hunger is great because we have given all our shekels unto Herbvius Pervius, and we have nothing to eat."
verse 12: And the Lord said, "Follow me and bring thy dishes, and they will be filled."
verse 13: And they came upon a large pig of 7 cubits in a ditch on the side of the road, and the Lord said unto the multitude, "Bring ye wood for roasting, swords for spiral slicing, and behold the swarm of bees and honey on it's body for honey glazing."
verse 14: Jesus yodeled.
verse 15: And there appeared Swiss cheese, and six-cubit long hoagie rolls.
verse 16: There were two trees on the other side of the road that had grown from mustard seeds, and bearing fruit of jars of mustard. One tree of Grey Poupon and one tree of Gulden's Spicy Brown.
verse 17: And Jesus cursed the Grey Poupon tree, and said unto them, "Grey Poupon is Herbvius Pervius' favorite, therefore I curse it. Choose ye therefore Gulden's."
verse 18: The multitude did eat ham sandwiches gushing with God chosen Gulden's condiment.
verse 19: And there came another greater multitude out of Nineveh, all hungry having given their shekels on their plates unto Herbvius Pervius. They came without plates or hoagie rolls. Then the Lord clicked his heels together three times saying, "There's no plates at home, there's no plates at home, there's no plates at home." and suddenly there appeared '70 times seven' plates, and many loaves of hoagie rolls.
verse 20: And all the multitude did eat of the ham sandwiches, and became full, even while Jesus spoke a prophetic warning that while most Jewish delis are ok, Subway would have an evil Jarod of Herbvius' proportions, and Jimmie John's would be led by a 'freaky fast' evil person killing exotic animals needlessly.
And thus is "the miracle of the loaves and the dishes" Amen.
If it is, and even it isn't Ralph, I bet he's been eating too much of some type of meat for his health - for that's the way with Pharisees.
I suspect Ralph because of his tell-tale inability to read the Bible.
Peter did say. "Never!" about eating da piggies. But, Peter also cried, "Never" when Jesus said He was going to wash his wee piggies (feet). Peter was so cool because he was such a COG-Pharisee asshole but, he changed completely each time Jesus worked him over.
Ralph would also miss the point about Peter's dream being all about formerly unclean animals - not men with uncut porkers. He also missed God's statement, repeated three times for clarity, specificity, and redundancy: "KILL and EAT, Peter!" Certainly, God was talking about killing and eating animals here, not Gentiles.
Yes, Peter had to learn that people were not to be treated as unclean - and - as that bit of Jewish tradition was destroyed, so was the prohibition on unclean meats.
“He also missed God's statement, repeated three times for clarity, specificity, and redundancy: 'KILL and EAT, Peter!' Certainly, God was talking about killing and eating animals here, not Gentiles.”
“Yes, Peter had to learn that people were not to be treated as unclean - and - as that bit of Jewish tradition was destroyed, so was the prohibition on unclean meats.”
Notice in the Bible story about the vision in Acts 10-11 that Peter NEVER did kill and eat any of the unclean animals. Peter just wondered what the vision MEANT. You seem to have missed that important point. Later, Peter explained that God had shown him that he should not call any MAN unclean. Peter NEVER said anywhere that God had shown him not to call pigs unclean. Peter NEVER said anywhere that he learned to like green eggs and ham.
“HWA was wrong to expropriate the identity and practices of the Jews for himself and his followers. This includes the prohibition against pork and other meats. This was stealing the Jews' cultural-religious identity. This was wrong of him to do this. This cheapened and degraded religious practices that are precious to religious Jews. This was disrespectful towards the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.”
“Armstrongism was never a part of Judaism so it is morally dubious that they should confuse people by adopting various Jewish practices for themselves.”
“Armstrongism's adoption of various Jewish practices is a wrong against the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.”
Well, Redfox, at least you are not “morally dubious” yourself. You are clearly morally warped! Your problem is that you do not believe in God.
HWA's teachings were based on the idea that God really does exist, that the Bible is His inspired word, and that God's ways, expressed by His laws, are good. HWA tried to teach people to obey God's good laws for their own good.
HWA did NOT teach people to obey the numerous, morally dubious, Jewish customs and traditions that Jews have invented over the years and that often effectively nullify the laws of God. These Jewish inventions cheapened and degraded the laws that are precious to God. This was disrespectful towards God and His true religion. Jews would do well to concentrate on obeying God's laws rather than making up so many Jewish customs and traditions of their own that actually nullify the word of God. This is a wrong that Jews commit against their God.
Anon 5:52...What's up with your comments slamming Ralph when it really wasn't called for, real Christian of you, his comments are just as welcome as yours, I mean it's okay to properly correct one another but there's no need to self righteously slam someone because you "suspect" them of something or disagree with them because they don't see something as you do, and your saying Ralph would also miss the point of Peters dream, why would you say that when you don't know what Ralph thinks, maybe he does get the point of Peters dream. Actually Anon 9:37 could have slammed you for missing the point of Peters dream, but he properly explained it without self righteously pointing his finger and trying to make you look bad.
You are right; I should be more gentle with ham-hating Ralph. He is entitled to his opinions and reading deficiency. However, you are wrong about Peter NEVER killing and eating unclean animals. Peter was very self-righteous about his record of doing what he thought was right - until God corrected him. After God told him to "Kill and eat" three times - you can bet that Peter obeyed the very words of God. After all, Peter never knew HWA, so he followed what God said rather than following the evil man. Armstrongites would rather follow HWA's command on what to eat, instead of following the words of God. I can see how someone may feel my words sounded self-righteous - that's not a good feel and I'm sorry. Although, my opinion is that Armstrongites are quick to label those that disagree with them as being self-righteous and are oblivious to their immersion in that same muck. Maybe Armstrongite reading and introspection deficiencies are due to not getting enough piggy in their diet.
Pure blasphemy all around, Christ would never touch an unclean pig! He also did not make it ok to eat filthy pigs! I should expect nothing less than this blasphemy from those that have turned their back on the truth.
ReplyDeleteANON at 1:34 PM,
ReplyDeleteWhat are you doing hanging here with these sinners?
Which COG are you in, that allows you to be here?
A friend of mine met Jesus recently at a place that served "non beef hot dogs- porky!", and my friend now loves Jesus and pork.
ReplyDelete1.34 PM talking of blasphemy, isn't that what the ministers are doing by hiding that Christ personally leads every Christian, with no middleman ministers. I have been reading church literature since the 1960s, and have never read an article or heard a sermon on Christ leading every individual member. Endless preaching of obey, yield, surrender, submit, but God has been pushed to one side. And by lording it over the members using verbal brutality and verbal murder (by attacking peoples self image), doesn't this amount to ministers being "god" to the church members?
ReplyDeleteTeaching Armstrong worship, minister worship, church worship, isn't this blasphemy?
ReplyDelete"Jesus and Bacon"
Neither Jesus nor his apostles ate any unclean creatures. At the worst, some Pharisees and teachers of the law once caught some of Jesus' disciples eating without first washing their hands (Matthew 15:1-2). None of them were ever accused of eating a ham sandwich, or even being seen with one.
In the vision recorded in Acts chapter 10, Peter said that he had NEVER eaten anything unclean (Acts 10:14). While Peter was wondering about the MEANING of the vision, some gentile visitors showed up, and Peter concluded that God had shown him not to call any MAN unclean (Acts 10:28) the way some Jews had done.
Many people today ignore what Peter said God had shown him, and think the vision meant that it is now okay to eat pigs (and get trichinosis), and civet cats (and get SARS), and monkeys (and get Ebola), etc.
Some people might even think that Peter was now free to eat the gentile visitors if he had wanted to. In the end, Peter even let the visitors go too after talking to them, even though cannibalism was now allowed according to some people's quick reading of the chapter.
Anon at 1:34... "Christ would never touch an unclean pig!".
ReplyDeleteUmmmm.... who do you think MADE pigs?
I find it amazing how people cherry pick the laws in God's word and decide which laws are done away with and what are still in effect. There are moral, social and health laws in Leviticus that we keep and no one seems to have a problem with that. Everyone agrees that murder, incest, rape, lying cheating and stealing are wrong, but when it comes to food laws such as unclean meats people cry foul! and deem it abolished under the new covenant. Even modern day medical science has proven that the unclean meats listed in scripture should be avoided as they can cause many illnesses such as heart disease, cancer, etc. Jesus said, "if you want to enter into life keep the commandments." That includes the food laws, and the Ten Commandment as well, which also includes the Sabbath.
ReplyDeleteMR Pigs?
ReplyDeleteMr not Pigs!
OSCAR
LIB
MR Pigs!
Translation:
ReplyDeleteEm are Pigs?
Em are not Pigs!
oh yes see they are
Well I'll be!
Em are Pigs!
HWA was wrong to expropriate the identity and practices of the Jews for himself and his followers. This includes the prohibition against pork and other meats. This was stealing the Jews' cultural-religious identity. This was wrong of him to do this. This cheapened and degraded religious practices that are precious to religious Jews. This was disrespectful towards the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.
ReplyDeleteArmstrongism was never a part of Judaism so it is morally dubious that they should confuse people by adopting various Jewish practices for themselves.
It is decided long ago by the early Christians, even before the New Testament was written, that the Gentile Christians were under no obligation to observe the rituals of Judaism. That is what the argument over circumcision was about.
Galatians was written not to condemn anti-law, Gnostic, proto-Catholics as Roderick Meredith would have us believe. It was written to condemn those who said Gentile Christians needed to be circumcised.
Armstrongism's adoption of various Jewish practices is a wrong against the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.
The dietary laws God gave were simply for health reasons not a ritual. There is plenty of science to back up avoiding the foods God said were not good to eat.
ReplyDeleteBeat up the Armstrongs as much as you wish, but if you let your bitterness rule your mind, you'll miss the truths that were revealed by these flawed humans. We are all flawed.
Unfortunately, many don't understand "the story behind the story" in the Bible.
ReplyDeleteHere's an example of one such hidden story, that's only available to those with the Holy Spirit-
verse 9: And it came to pass, Jesus left Nineveh on the road to the south to wash his feet in the Tigris River,
verse 10: For the Lord's feet stunk mightily, for Chief Pharisee Herbvius Pervius did refuse to wash them.
verse 11: And a multitude met Jesus on the road, saying, "Lord, our hunger is great because we have given all our shekels unto Herbvius Pervius, and we have nothing to eat."
verse 12: And the Lord said, "Follow me and bring thy dishes, and they will be filled."
verse 13: And they came upon a large pig of 7 cubits in a ditch on the side of the road, and the Lord said unto the multitude, "Bring ye wood for roasting, swords for spiral slicing, and behold the swarm of bees and honey on it's body for honey glazing."
verse 14: Jesus yodeled.
verse 15: And there appeared Swiss cheese, and six-cubit long hoagie rolls.
verse 16: There were two trees on the other side of the road that had grown from mustard seeds, and bearing fruit of jars of mustard. One tree of Grey Poupon and one tree of Gulden's Spicy Brown.
verse 17: And Jesus cursed the Grey Poupon tree, and said unto them, "Grey Poupon is Herbvius Pervius' favorite, therefore I curse it. Choose ye therefore Gulden's."
verse 18: The multitude did eat ham sandwiches gushing with God chosen Gulden's condiment.
verse 19: And there came another greater multitude out of Nineveh, all hungry having given their shekels on their plates unto Herbvius Pervius. They came without plates or hoagie rolls. Then the Lord clicked his heels together three times saying, "There's no plates at home, there's no plates at home, there's no plates at home." and suddenly there appeared '70 times seven' plates, and many loaves of hoagie rolls.
verse 20: And all the multitude did eat of the ham sandwiches, and became full, even while Jesus spoke a prophetic warning that while most Jewish delis are ok, Subway would have an evil Jarod of Herbvius' proportions, and Jimmie John's would be led by a 'freaky fast' evil person killing exotic animals needlessly.
And thus is "the miracle of the loaves and the dishes"
Amen.
I suspect the ham hater is Ralph!
ReplyDeleteIf it is, and even it isn't Ralph, I bet he's been eating too much of some type of meat for his health - for that's the way with Pharisees.
I suspect Ralph because of his tell-tale inability to read the Bible.
Peter did say. "Never!" about eating da piggies. But, Peter also cried, "Never" when Jesus said He was going to wash his wee piggies (feet). Peter was so cool because he was such a COG-Pharisee asshole but, he changed completely each time Jesus worked him over.
Ralph would also miss the point about Peter's dream being all about formerly unclean animals - not men with uncut porkers. He also missed God's statement, repeated three times for clarity, specificity, and redundancy: "KILL and EAT, Peter!" Certainly, God was talking about killing and eating animals here, not Gentiles.
Yes, Peter had to learn that people were not to be treated as unclean - and - as that bit of Jewish tradition was destroyed, so was the prohibition on unclean meats.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 5:52 PM said...
“He also missed God's statement, repeated three times for clarity, specificity, and redundancy: 'KILL and EAT, Peter!' Certainly, God was talking about killing and eating animals here, not Gentiles.”
“Yes, Peter had to learn that people were not to be treated as unclean - and - as that bit of Jewish tradition was destroyed, so was the prohibition on unclean meats.”
Notice in the Bible story about the vision in Acts 10-11 that Peter NEVER did kill and eat any of the unclean animals. Peter just wondered what the vision MEANT. You seem to have missed that important point. Later, Peter explained that God had shown him that he should not call any MAN unclean. Peter NEVER said anywhere that God had shown him not to call pigs unclean. Peter NEVER said anywhere that he learned to like green eggs and ham.
ReplyDeleteRedfox712 said...
“HWA was wrong to expropriate the identity and practices of the Jews for himself and his followers. This includes the prohibition against pork and other meats. This was stealing the Jews' cultural-religious identity. This was wrong of him to do this. This cheapened and degraded religious practices that are precious to religious Jews. This was disrespectful towards the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.”
“Armstrongism was never a part of Judaism so it is morally dubious that they should confuse people by adopting various Jewish practices for themselves.”
“Armstrongism's adoption of various Jewish practices is a wrong against the Jewish people and the Jewish religion.”
Well, Redfox, at least you are not “morally dubious” yourself. You are clearly morally warped! Your problem is that you do not believe in God.
HWA's teachings were based on the idea that God really does exist, that the Bible is His inspired word, and that God's ways, expressed by His laws, are good. HWA tried to teach people to obey God's good laws for their own good.
HWA did NOT teach people to obey the numerous, morally dubious, Jewish customs and traditions that Jews have invented over the years and that often effectively nullify the laws of God. These Jewish inventions cheapened and degraded the laws that are precious to God. This was disrespectful towards God and His true religion. Jews would do well to concentrate on obeying God's laws rather than making up so many Jewish customs and traditions of their own that actually nullify the word of God. This is a wrong that Jews commit against their God.
Anon 5:52...What's up with your comments slamming Ralph when it really wasn't called for, real Christian of you, his comments are just as welcome as yours, I mean it's okay to properly correct one another but there's no need to self righteously slam someone because you "suspect" them of something or disagree with them because they don't see something as you do, and your saying Ralph would also miss the point of Peters dream, why would you say that when you don't know what Ralph thinks, maybe he does get the point of Peters dream. Actually Anon 9:37 could have slammed you for missing the point of Peters dream, but he properly explained it without self righteously pointing his finger and trying to make you look bad.
ReplyDeleteMarch 18, 2016 at 3:12 AM
ReplyDeleteArmstrongism doesn't just teach crazed doctrines. There is also the skill in the training of assholes and head-up-your-assitis syndromes.
March 16, 2016 at 7:47 AM
ReplyDeleteOMG! what translation of the bible is that? I would even buy it on amazon.
smoked ham IS addictive, and especially prosciutto!
You are right; I should be more gentle with ham-hating Ralph.
ReplyDeleteHe is entitled to his opinions and reading deficiency.
However, you are wrong about Peter NEVER killing and eating unclean animals.
Peter was very self-righteous about his record of doing what he thought was right - until God corrected him.
After God told him to "Kill and eat" three times - you can bet that Peter obeyed the very words of God.
After all, Peter never knew HWA, so he followed what God said rather than following the evil man.
Armstrongites would rather follow HWA's command on what to eat, instead of following the words of God.
I can see how someone may feel my words sounded self-righteous - that's not a good feel and I'm sorry. Although, my opinion is that Armstrongites are quick to label those that disagree with them as being self-righteous and are oblivious to their immersion in that same muck.
Maybe Armstrongite reading and introspection deficiencies are due to not getting enough piggy in their diet.