(Bulletin, June 1975)
The Gospel of Jesus Christ was never worthy for the common person.
At least, according to Herbert Armstrong.
Those who are illiterate, cannot read or write, whose minds are like "dumb animals" were not worthy to comprehend Herbert's Message. Herbert wanted absolutely nothing to do with such stupid people, I guess.
They have NO middle-class people. I guess you have to be middle-class to enjoy a meeting with God's One and Only Apostle.
The educated are at the top. The "Tragically poor and ignorant" are at the bottom. These are Herbert's words, not mine.
So Herbert only wanted to talk to the "important people". Not the ones who are on the same level as "millions of cows, horses and chickens". Whatever happened to "Feed my sheep"? Oh, wait. To Herbert, they were "DUMB sheep".
Comparing the people of India, the South-east Asian Nations, and those in Africa and South America to cows, horses and chickens, calling them ignorant, illiterate, and with minds not much above dumb animals - well, what else could you expect from Herbert Armstrong. No wonder he wanted them segregated. Because they're different from those in the United States. Of course, they are.
You wanted nothing to do with them, Herbert Armstrong. To you. their minds were undeveloped.
You would much rather preach a gospel that wasn't a gospel to those at dinners, and luncheons, and Rotary Clubs, and in Lions Clubs then ever be around those who you thought had minds not much greater than dumb animals - like preaching to cows and horses and chickens.
The crap that cows, horses and chickens lived in was so much better than the disgusting crap that I read here. And if Herbert were any sort of a Christian, he would have regarded those from India, Asia, Africa and South America as God's Children too - not the dumb ignorant poor people he wanted absolutely nothing to do with.
But, after the conversations we've had the past few days, I think I understand.
Yes, I know Herbert's dead, readers. But allow me the opportunity of expression here at Banned.
submitted by SHT
34 comments:
True.
The middle classes were the ones targeted in Italy, Greece (southern nato command) not to succumb to the evil Soviet empire.
The statue in front of the auditorium was named and symbolized "Aspiration". THE distinghuishing trait of the middle class.
Herbert W Armstrong was the perfect Cold War anti communist warior with his financial sponsoring of the CIA stations, radio swan, radio monte carlo, radio caroline and other north sea stations aimed to sway the middle classes toward anglo saxon culture through popular music and exposure to that culture.
I urge you to study the radio programming of pre 1939 western europe (similar to german culture) and post 1945 radio programming. Elvis, Everley Brothers, the Beatles and the moral behavior of the post war generation vs pre war.
You cannot fathom the flirtation with communism in destitute post war europe.
I'm not repeating the CIA pushing of the Monroe doctrine in South and Central America, Cuba leading to junta regimes much apreciated against the battle against the Soviet empire. The role of the catholic church in social matters in the south americas.
Ronald Reagan payed lip service to the Free Mandela crowd UNTIL the soviet empire had collapsed and the anc communist sympathizer mandela was ordered to be released by the american empire after the promise to spare the south african middle class initially.
Just follow the yellow brick road......or the GII flight path and all will be revealed to you, until you finally meet the wizzard of ozz, a fallible man doing where his talent led him.
Nck
Where the CIA resorted to the ousting of leaders as HWA often alluded to or media propaganda. The KGB and Catholic church collided on another level in the struggle for the hearts and minds of the people.
For further study on the religious struggle during the Cold War in the named countries, I recommend to type "liberation theology and communism" into the all knowing search engine of choice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/former-soviet-spy-we-created-liberation-theology-83634
https://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/21/magazine/the-case-against-liberation-theology.html
http://www.ceimsa.org/publications/Students/Grace.pdf
https://nacla.org/news/popes-holy-war-against-liberation-theology
nck
I guess you must be young and never heard Herbert's message for yourself.
HIs whole focus was that the masses would not be called until the Second Resurrection. At that time, they would look back on how their miserable lives had gone during Satan's 6,000-year rule, and they would realize that God's (Herbert's) Way works so much better.
Remember, Herbert actually did not put the focus on his members' salvation. They were called in order to support him, and their salvation was a secondary by-product of their supporting him by tithing to finance his work.
The ignorant masses were ignorant, yes, but the real reason Herbert didn't care about them was that they didn't have enough money to pay three tithes and finance his activities.
"But allow me the opportunity of expression here at Banned."
Allow you???
I think SHT's contribution is about the best exposure of the armstrong empire ideology in many years. Although I believe that some of my expounding on the wider context of the times -SHT seems to be kicking and fulminating against one particular tree in blind anger, somewhat debilitating his personal abilities to see the entire forest right in front of him.
nck
Can i ask who SHT is ? Bit confused.
Herberts been dead 30 odd years now he belonged to a different era.
This like HWA setting the stage for the AICF, a solution to the problem of the unwashed masses. Missionaries failed by bringing the word to the hoi polloi, not Steuben crystal to the powers that be.
"Dumb animals," isn't that the way HWAs ministers see and treat their members.
I know many people who have only a few years of primary school education, but to say that preaching to these people would be like preaching to cows, horses and chickens is ridiculous. What HWA ignores is that these people have a God plane mind. Even with minimum education, these people can still easily understand.
Like many, I'm occasionally been surprised at the intellectual firepower of children. I've heard 10 year olds interviewed, and give answers as good as most adults. The God plane mind thingy.
The average IQ in black Africa is 70. Progressives hate that fact, so they deny it. They prefer to live in childish illusions, such as i) we are all the same, and ii) progressive brainwashing is all it takes to save the world.
"Herbert's been dead 30 odd years now he belonged to a different era."
True.
But it is important to understand exactly how, and why, the Splinters got to where they are today. You can't really understand why a child behaves the way that they do unless you look at their parents and see how they were brought up.
You can be in the Splinters and wonder why you're in the mess you are in. Or you can actually discover the reasons and shed some illumination on the subject. This is not about Herbert Armstrong (though he's a big part of it, and must be talked about.) . There's a bigger picture here. And it explains everything. One just has to discover. If one's willing to open up the book of discovery and read a little. That's one reason I do this - and the other reason is obviously personal. I know I'm opening a can of worms. But.....
Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.
writer and philosopher George Santayana
-SHT
"Remember, Herbert actually did not put the focus on his members' salvation. They were called in order to support him, and their salvation was a secondary by-product of their supporting him by tithing to finance his work.
The ignorant masses were ignorant, yes, but the real reason Herbert didn't care about them was that they didn't have enough money to pay three tithes and finance his activities."
I agree. That's one part (albeit a HUGE part) of the equation. And yes, I did hear Herbert's message for myself. All too well, mind you. The other part that I am exposing here is a dark and ugly part that too many do not want to admit to. It was a part that directly caused the attitudes and characteristics that exist in many of the leaders of the Armstrong movement today. Too many are in denial about how it all started, which explains a multitude of questions, and refuse to even want to admit the possibility that this was the way it was. The only possible way to share the truth is to forego personal opinion, and bring it out from the author himself.
It's like the holidays question we all know. The COG's always have said that you can't understand them until you look into their origins. Using their own methodology in principle seems to be an excellent idea, to me.
-SHT
3:15
True.
The original poster does not seem to know much about armstrongist teaching. However if the person was young he would have known about how proud hwa was about the school in nuwara eliya and the even made a "documentary" about the work with the thai hilltribes on the fight against poverty, poppies and politics.
Nck
HWA had the same attitude towards the "poor , uneducated , farmers of the Willamette Valley" that he first came into contact with from the Church of God 7th Day back around 1930.
HWA was an extremely "class conscious" individual , shown obviously by his obsession for extreme living lifestyle at the expense of the common brethren and his "let them eat cake" attitude.
This dictat reveals herberts deeply held issues towards class and poverty. It is not Biblical at all. Compare Jesus Christ sat at the water well talking to the Samaritan woman. All the poor and wretched coming to hear Jesus Christ in his earthly ministry. The church of snobbery not the church of God. Have the middle class only got character ? Is Faith only limited to certain class systems? Does God only work with middle class worldly class systems ?
"This dictat reveals herberts deeply held issues towards class and poverty. It is not Biblical at all. Compare Jesus Christ sat at the water well talking to the Samaritan woman. All the poor and wretched coming to hear Jesus Christ in his earthly ministry. The church of snobbery not the church of God."
-This.
One of the things that needs to be examined is Herbert's claim that he was converted, and that all of the conceit, ego, and vanity that he says was washed away at his "conversion to Christ". What this exposes is that there really was not any change from his attitudes before his conversion, to his attitudes after his conversion. This brings into mind a lot of questions.
If Herbert Armstrong was not truly converted, then
1) Does this explain the failures of his prophesies?
2) Does this explain the attitudes, tempers and rage?
3) What about the conduct of GTA? Should this not have been?
4) Why was he embarrassed about teaching Christ to the "important people"?
5) Would he not have wanted to visit with the poor and "uneducated", like Jesus did?
6) Of course, does this expose even more racism? Was he admitting "superiority"?
7) Was comparing people to farm animals appropriate to an apostle?
8) Herbert always "railed" against the educated and intelligent of the world. Why now is this a good thing?
9) How is the Gospel of Jesus Christ incomprehensible to these nations, if Jesus said that the Kingdom of God is for "little children" and to bring those unto "me"?
10) How would preaching to kings and heads of states possibly trickle down to the "dumb sheep"?
These are just a few of the questions that I wanted to bring out. Perhaps I should have included them in this submission. But here they are, nonetheless.
-SHT
9:59 AM,
To add.. Are people who make big money the only ones that can afford all the tithing that is required? A person who does lawn service and cuts grass for a living, they can't be converted because they can't afford all the tithing and pay their bills?
6.46 AM
Googling your claim that black Africans have a IQ of 70, challenges your claim.
One article "Study of African IQ levels proven to be substandard" states "..examined over 100 studies, concluding that there is no evidence to back up Lynn's claims"
That writing is absolute proof that HWA had no intention to fulfill Matt. 24:14. Yet this same man repeated over and over and over again that the gospel had been and was going to the whole world while he was alive. A willful flagrant intentional lie was sold to over 150,000 people who bought it like a mass of uneducated animals with blind folds on but with money in their pockets.
I wonder how HWA is going to interact with all the uneducated disciple/apostle fishermen and the "Fathers" who were mostly sheep and goat shepherds in the KINGDOM of GOD?
All along I thought I was a member of the WCG, and now it would be more accurate to claim I was a member of the EMCG and the rest of the world was little more than dumb animals.
HWA did indeed see that the purpose of the members was to support him. This came from Herman Hoeh's taking the KJV's poor translation of Eph 4:11-12. This taught that the purpose of the church leaders was to build up the saints so that they could support the work of "the ministry". Since the word for ministry actually means service, this verse really states that the purpose of the church leaders is to build up the saints for the saints' works of service. Rather than teaching that the purpose of the saints is to support the work of the ministry, this verse actually says the opposite, that the purpose of the ministry is to support the work of the saints.
"HWA did indeed see that the purpose of the members was to support him. "
Co-Worker letter, March 10, 1965, HWA:
"Our purpose is NOT to "get members" or to build a religious
organization -- never has been -- but to PROCLAIM AND PUBLISH
CHRIST'S GOSPEL MESSAGE -- which is an educational message -- to
the world AS A WITNESS (Mat. 24:14; MarK 13:10)."
-SHT
Another point I want to bring out that I did not include in this writing. This is from the March 10 "1965 Co-Worker Book (It's really, really long).
"I was dumbfounded to discover that in boyhood Sunday School
days, I had been taught in many basic doctrines, the precise
opposite of what the Bible plainly teaches. I was astonished to
find that, taken to mean what it plainly says, THE BIBLE MAKES
SENSE! It became the most interesting study of my life. I saw
that I had to surrender my will to GOD. I did. I accepted CHRIST.
I was baptized in a Baptist Church, though I did not join it. My
understanding was opened by receiving God's Holy Spirit -- just as
God promises all minds may be. Now I could begin to UNDERSTAND the
Bible. It was a thrilling experience.
Herbert Armstrong here says that - And GET THIS - that he RECEIVED God's Holy Spirit FROM A BAPTISM IN A BAPTIST CHURCH.
How is that possible if these were "Satan's Churches"? Does anyone else notice the problem here?
If HWA is claiming he received the Holy Spirit from A BAPTIST CHURCH, then he is admitting that the Baptist Church is NOT Satan's church, and was baptized "In the World". This invalidates everything he ever taught about the Worldly Churches.
However, If HWA was right about the Baptist Church BEING Satan's Church, then, the spirit he got was not the Holy Spirit - but an evil spirit, right?
Either way, he was not BAPTIZED in the "Church of God", but STILL claims to have received the Holy Spirit.
Anyone wish to tackle this one?
-SHT
Thanks, 1:52, but he’ll just wait a few months and then come back and repeat it again. We’ve countered him before with fact, and he just seems to have this need to believe that Africans are inferior. Says more about his own insecurities than the intelligence of African people.
4:26
It becomes increasingly clear that you have read only few materials on the wcg belief system filtered through current christian thought.
Hwa explained his baptism through the holy spirit, as the rituals had been administered by the "mythical" church, since the "corporate" was only "activated" around 1934. Even when God "moved the lampstand", church era doctrine allowed for "some converted" (as there are some among you) in strains of other church eras, being sardis, laodicea etc although as a whole god had "spewed them out of his mouth", armstrongs god called individually. (although no one likes my posting on how I explain that armstrongs god was an american, as again proven by the individualism.
Nck
Somehow, any baptism would do when he wanted to get his way. Funny how quickly people will give themselves an "out" yet be harsh on others.
Armstrongism was no exception to the general belief that the sovereign god is not limited and can work with anyone he pleases.
Being unbaptized little children, the architects of the auditorium or handl writing the messiah.
Mozart?, arab princesses?, budhist thai royal family, Michaelangelo?
The church however was perceived as an instrument for edification of the future royal priesthood. Other churches at best, would be regarded as a local state college offering limited courses, while wcg was regarded as gods private ivy league and ac gods own west point.
Nck
As one raised in wcg I knew God had also generously thrown a couple of holy spirit nuggets around in other churches, like a westerner visiting 3rd world countries, while "at home" being actively involved in poverty alleviating programs paying up to 40 percent taxes to finance all that.
At family functions however, attending others church services, I noted that the level of philosophical sophistication was often more substantial than I had expected, going by Armstrongist teaching.
The aforementioned does not prove anything regarding ones personal salvation as they are observations only.
Nck
I'm anon 9:59 and in reply to -SHT I remember years ago some thought Loma was converted and Herbert was not fully converted. None can know for sure but that idea had gone around certain COG groups in years past.
Herbert was most likely to be suffering from some sort of mental anguish from being poor. There are many cases of very poor people who succeed to great success and wealth carrying with them issues for the rest of their life. Herbert was a classic case. He differs in that his wealth was dependant on others much poorer than he.
"It becomes increasingly clear that you have read only few materials on the wcg belief system filtered through current christian thought."
Herberts' thought process varied, depending on how it favored him.
His entire writings were dictated on his opinions.
If Herbert himself got baptized in a Baptist Church, then obviously God's Holy Spirit descended on him, and anointed him to become God's One and Only Apostle.
IF anyone ELSE got baptized in a Baptist Church, then that baptism is invalid because it is one of Satan's churches.
This is duplicity, a double standard, and incorrect theology. What I am saying is clear: If the Holy Spirit descended on someone through a Baptist Church baptism, it invalidates the majority of his teachings. Otherwise, it's hypocritical and only applies when he says it applies. That's incorrect and theologically WRONG.
This had been the process over, and over again. Herbert could do no wrong. He spend countless letters defending himself - whether it came to the Receivership, or accusations, or anyone who did not agree with his opinions. If this was anyone else, the Baptism would have been invalid, and the individual would have had to be baptized by a Worldwide Church of God minister. Tell me that that would not be the case. Because it was Herbert, it was okay.
This has nothing to do with how well-read I am. I am not looking at this in a "literature" point if view. This has everything to do with the full blend and context if his integrated character, and how he viewed and attacked everything and anyone that went contrary to his opinion.
The truth of the matter is, what went okay for him would be condemned for others. This is the context in his writings. He knew best, and all others did not.
Again. This has nothing to do with how literate I am with his writings - I understand what he SAID. I have listened to countless sermons on what he SAID. I have stood behind the lectern myself. Don't judge me a stranger to the written doctrinal positions of HWA. It's what he DID when someone actually stood up to his duplicity and hypocrisy and doctrine and character that I am looking at here.
(The above post is a reply to NCK from SHT. I forgot to sign it.)
"Herbert Armstrong here says that - And GET THIS - that he RECEIVED God's Holy Spirit FROM A BAPTISM IN A BAPTIST CHURCH.
How is that possible if these were "Satan's Churches"? Does anyone else notice the problem here?
If HWA is claiming he received the Holy Spirit from A BAPTIST CHURCH, then he is admitting that the Baptist Church is NOT Satan's church, and was baptized "In the World". This invalidates everything he ever taught about the Worldly Churches.
However, If HWA was right about the Baptist Church BEING Satan's Church, then, the spirit he got was not the Holy Spirit - but an evil spirit, right?
Either way, he was not BAPTIZED in the "Church of God", but STILL claims to have received the Holy Spirit.
Anyone wish to tackle this one?"
Couple of things:
1) According to his autobiography, Herb was baptized and "converted" around the Spring of 1927. Immediately afterward, he says he concluded that smoking was about gratifying "the lust of the flesh, so he righteously gave up the habit. But a few years later, apparently from 1933 to 1943, he took up the habit of regularly raping his daughter Dorothy, which is not only about the "lust of the flesh," but a crime to boot. A curious sort of "conversion," a curious sort of "holy spirit" that allows for that. Reading that autobiography in light of this additional fact he conveniently left out, the whole thing reads like the most amazing hypocrisy.
2) Perhaps we all can recall that Herb told us that COG7D was the "Sardis Era" of the "true church of god against which the gates of hell had never prevailed and had been the keepers of the true doctrines since the apostolic church. Not only is the "church eras" thing based upon an unwarranted interpretation of Revelation 2-3, the COG7D does not hail from any such apostolic succession or lineage, descending from the Sunday keeping Millerite movement in the 19th century and denies any such claim of apostolic succession or lineage for itself.
If basing Herb's authority on the rationale that god uprooted and "called individually" to wholesale supplant had been adequate, then it would not have been necessary to have sought the additional rationale of apostolic succession. The spurious "church eras" reading of Revelation 2-3 would not have been necessary, nor would it have been necessary to saddle COG7D with the malign description of being a "dead." But it was sought, and WCG always claimed, as do some of the splinters to this day, that they can "trace their roots back to the first century church." Which of course they can't. Claims of apostolic succession are a lie. One they feel is necessary.
Anon 4:24, Yes, HWA has been gone over 30 years, but he and his false teaching are constantly being referred to in most of the COGs. COGWA encourages that HWA's autobiography be read by the youth in order to know their faith background. Their beliefs require HWA to be inspired as it is not supportable from simply the Bible. Everything is like a house of cards. They all fall if you remove the HWA card.
So, you obviously do not adhere to christian teachings that adam and eve and noah"s family were the only people om earth.
Incest for their children would have been wrong in your rationale.
I second that.
Nck
When did you make up that the church taught "apostolic succession" never heard of it.
Don't try to find it. It was never taught. There was this stuff about era's, lampstands/candles, withering branches...,,,,but apostolic succession........?
Nck
Sometimes an elephant was just an elephant, and not an apostle or restorer of truth.
SHT
Ok. I get your point.
My point (without expounding to much) was that hwa was somewhat applying ordinary protestant theology on the church being "the vessel" of truth while the bishops are the teachers. It is a very old debate including the "laying of hands' thing or the catholic literal apostolic succession.
Even in wcg's (concocted history) they did not claim that "Peter Waldo" or "Peter of Bruys" were in a line of DIRECT apostolic succession. It is interesting to see the "Church of England" view on apostolic succession or that of the early church fathers, but I will keep it short.
In reality I believe HWA at first did not "rebaptize" a lot of first members coming from certain churches. A bit like some of the cultic off shoots today who do not rebaptize new members baptized before 1985.
But Ok, I got your general point on HWA character instead of the finesses of a theological debate on the legitimacy of "the church of england", protestantism or perhaps any american church.
nck
Post a Comment