Throughout life, the typical year of an Armstrongite or a child born in Armstrongism is pretty bland. Besides the annual year-after-year COG traditions, most celebrations are shunned, banned, or ignored. Birthdays have never been any different.
Of course, our doubly-blessed prophet Bob Theil of the improperly-named "Continuing Church of God" continues assaulting the practice of avoiding birthdays within the Church - this time, those who celebrate birthdays with - you ready for this? Satanism.
He continues to try everything in his glorious scholarly ability to point out what he considers valid reasons why birthdays are so dastardly evil. He looks into as many historic sources as possible to prove his already set in stone bias, to confirm his position. From astrology to Catholic theologians to now even trying to pull out the Satanism card - he keeps hitting the birthdays with his foam sledgehammer over and over and over again. It's the same song and the same story - even though he clearly admits the Bible has no specific commands that prohibit the celebration of birthdays! His latest drivel clearly seems to attempt to provoke fear among people that they might be inviting demons just because they are honoring the day of someone's birth.
Of course, this is absolutely and totally ridiculous. Celebrating a birthday has nothing to do with either astrology, or the writings of Catholicism, and to even compare it with the practices of Satanists is beyond absurd. It's just plain ridiculous. And here's why.
The celebration of a birthday - especially for a child - is an act of love, acknowledging thanksgiving and gratefulness to God for another year of life for a person. It is a time of family and friends to gather and reflect on the year, enjoy friends and fellowship, give gifts of recognition, and enjoy a great time. Not only this - it's absolutely helpful to help build a sense of belonging, self-esteem, and value among friends and family. It is thrilling to see friends and family come together on this special day, to acknowledge that you - you as a person - are valued, and are loved.
More than this, it is a freedom that all people have a right to choose on their own as to if, how, and when and why they should or shouldn't celebrate it. Certain personalities may not want to have a birthday celebration - and that's fine. Certain persons may benefit from one - to help them out of a depression, or out of a bad time - or to just know that they are valued. Whatever is done, as long as it is done in love toward one another - against such there is no law. Perhaps this is why the Bible never mentions it - because it's personal! It is a decision that can only be determined by a person and a family. It is not a theological issue, or an issue any church needs to get their nose bent out of shape over.
The bottom line is: Because birthdays have no specific command for or against it, Bob should keep his unordained, self-appointed opinions to himself. But since he will not, I would hope that any who read it will recognize that it is their decision, their lives, their families, and is solely between them and the God whom they serve. Birthdays can be of great value if done in the spirit of love to one another. It's time that members of the Churches of God take back their lives from those who do everything they can to dictate decisions people are more than capable of making for themselves.
The celebration of a birthday - especially for a child - is an act of love, acknowledging thanksgiving and gratefulness to God for another year of life for a person. It is a time of family and friends to gather and reflect on the year, enjoy friends and fellowship, give gifts of recognition, and enjoy a great time. Not only this - it's absolutely helpful to help build a sense of belonging, self-esteem, and value among friends and family. It is thrilling to see friends and family come together on this special day, to acknowledge that you - you as a person - are valued, and are loved.
More than this, it is a freedom that all people have a right to choose on their own as to if, how, and when and why they should or shouldn't celebrate it. Certain personalities may not want to have a birthday celebration - and that's fine. Certain persons may benefit from one - to help them out of a depression, or out of a bad time - or to just know that they are valued. Whatever is done, as long as it is done in love toward one another - against such there is no law. Perhaps this is why the Bible never mentions it - because it's personal! It is a decision that can only be determined by a person and a family. It is not a theological issue, or an issue any church needs to get their nose bent out of shape over.
The bottom line is: Because birthdays have no specific command for or against it, Bob should keep his unordained, self-appointed opinions to himself. But since he will not, I would hope that any who read it will recognize that it is their decision, their lives, their families, and is solely between them and the God whom they serve. Birthdays can be of great value if done in the spirit of love to one another. It's time that members of the Churches of God take back their lives from those who do everything they can to dictate decisions people are more than capable of making for themselves.
submitted by SHT
21 comments:
When we were in WCG we celebrated our childrens birthdays. We had always believed the church was wrong in their teachings against birthday celebrations.
Didn't the WCG argue that the two incidences where birthdays were celebrated, someone got killed? So why ban birthdays? Why not ban drinking alcohol? Why not ban eating in a large group? Wouldn't drinking too much alcohol be more directly responsible than the "theme" of the gathering? Prohibit alcohol? How silly of me to suggest such an outrageous idea. "More Dom Perignon, Mr. Armstrong?"
The article mentions that birthday observance is a freedom that all people have. Well, the author seems to have forgotten the in the ACOGs "freedom" is a dirty word. Look at what LCG's Scott Winnail has given us today:
The Freedom Trap
A spoiled little ministerial kid dares to question whether the USA's freedom is a good thing, failing to realize that without such freedom he might be in jail for preaching his message. Well, Scott, have you considered the example of those countries that do not have the USA's freedom but that do live by most or all of the Ten Commandments? Let's consider North Korea.
In North Korea, there is far less covetousness than in the United States. There is far less adultery. There is far less theft. Their culture places great emphasis on honoring one’s parents and ancestors. Even the murder rate is lower than in the USA (though they have the death penalty for some crimes, just like the USA). Additionally, their people are taught to obey the principle of Romans 13, to honor and obey their rulers. They are taught to worship one god (the ruling member of the Kim family) and never to blaspheme that god. Basically, with the exception of a Sabbath, they live a life much closer to the Ten Commandments than is found in the USA.
If Scott's thesis is correct, the people of North Korea should be almost as happy as the members of LCG, and both should be happier than the average American. Or is it, instead, that Scott values an LCG culture that gives him as a minister much more freedom than it gives ordinary members, including the freedom to disparage freedom?
That's one of the things I regret most while raising my children in the cult, and that is ignoring birthdays. I didn't want to ignore them. I thought that it should be a day of celebration, but of course hwa said no, and we had to obey everything he said... Now I try to make up for it but it's too late now. They needed that when they were children. Sometimes I really have to fight the hate I feel towards hwa. It's hard sometimes.
never understood the birthday thing either...
we just didn't discuss it at church, but we always celebrated family birthdays...
yeah pagans celebrate birthdays, but they eat hamburgers and frenchfries too...
if someone threw a big party in honor of himself, I could see how that would be a problem (the real takeaway from the story of Herod)....but I don't know anyone that throws their own party, and it's unlikely I would attend if they did.
Because birthdays have no specific command for or against it, Bob should keep his unordained, self-appointed opinions to himself.
Yet that didn't stop SHT from offering an opinion about them. Perhaps he/she was ordained by someone else.
In any case: if practicing Christians say life begins at conception, why celebrate birthdays at all? Why not celebrate conception days?
Hypocrisy all around. God said only he can make anything holy. HWA made compromises on a lot of things and therefore it's easy to bash his logic and choices.
The bible says to only worship god and no one else can make a day holy. Check yourself if you think it is ok to celebrate any man made holy day of any kind. If you are honest with yourself you may find your own hypocrisy that needs fixing.
Just another thing Herbie stole from the JW playbook...
In my WCG days, the teaching and scope on observing birthdays varied. On one hand, acknowledging someone's birthday, particularly on an "important" one (like 21, 65, etc) was "okay", but big birthday parties and expensive gifts were out. However, I remember a large party for a member's son when he turned 21.
Of course HWA told the story of Haile Selassie sending him a birthday telegram (a few days before he was executed) and GTA tells of HWA holding a 21st party for him (when he was still in the Navy).
One teaching Bob doesn't stick to is makeup -- his stated position is that HWA was "back and forth" about it.
In Bob's article, I didn't notice his other Biblical "anti-birthday" reference: he's stated that he thinks Job's children were allowed to be killed because they were holding a birthday party...
R.L.
Perhaps I did not phrase that comment clear enough.
Bob is speaking as "an authority", supposedly under divine inspiration and calling as a "prophet" of God, claiming a ministerial right to dictate his opinion, and expect others to follow that opinion as if disobeying it is disobeying a Godly edict, and those who ignore it are in a sort of rebellious spirit.
The opinion I offer is not being offered with any sort of inspiration. Just common sense, no "divinely inspired" strings attached.
This was my mistake by not clarifying what I meant with the quote you have used for comment.
5:12 said:
" The article mentions that birthday observance is a freedom that all people have. Well, the author seems to have forgotten the in the ACOGs "freedom" is a dirty word. Look at what LCG's Scott Winnail has given us today:
Truth is, I didn't forget. I ignored that they believe this because it isn't true, and didn't really fit into the context of the article. It is a shame that they feel this way. It's just another element into the induction of mind control into the lives of their members - making them think that just because they say it, it's true, when it is not. Sadly, most members of ACOG's are so used to the control they have allowed ministers to have over them, that they wouldn't be comfortable with the "normal" level of freedom if they had it.
Sadly - and I hate using this analogy, because I'm talking about PEOPLE - not animals. It's like if you open a door to a pet that has never been outside in it's life. They'll cower and run under the bed. Freedom, when it's an unknown, can be quite scary. The COG's treat their members like animals - denying them the basics of life and keeping them under the cover of their interpretation of law. "No, you can't do this, No you can't do that. Get off the table. Sit. Stay. Roll over. Lay Down. Good boy. Now go and get me a beer (tithe). I said get me a beer! Bad pet! Go lay down. Stop licking. WHAT DO YOU WANT? I'm busy right now. There. A scratch on the head. Good boy. I'll let you go outside, but only ON YOUR LEASH, and don't even THINK about running away. You'll get hit by a car. You don't want that, do you?"
If birthday parties are evil, then why not ban national holidays such as Thanks giving day and similar? Why not ban wedding celebrations? How can the FOT celebrating be justified?
Herb gave away his motive for banning birthday parties with his often repeated
"beware the evil of self esteem." It's bully morality. Members are dirt, who don't deserve freedom or deserve to be treated justly. It's a spirit of murder, of keeping members beaten down to fulfil minister power lust.
It boils down to ministers craving power and superiority over members. That Bob and other ACOG leaders are on board is hardly surprising.
R.L.
Yep, only ordained ministers have right to a opinion. Spoken like a minister. My first minister radiated the belief that if any member made a decision, they were defrauding him, since only (ordained) ministers have a right to make decisions.
Making decisions is control. Dictionaries define ownership as control. So this amounts to stealing the talents that Christ gives to every member in the parable of the talents. Stealing these talents is robbing members of their lives.
Brace yourself for the lake of fire. You richly deserve it!
"
This was my mistake by not clarifying what I meant with the quote you have used for comment. "
SHT, you didn't owe rl any explanation nor did you make any mistake. If he doesn't want to read your opinions he doesn't have to come to this site.
I hope the door hits him hard on the ass when he leaves.
Just to be clear, wedding anniversaries - ok, local church anniversaries - ok, anniversaries of the birth of a loved one - sin. How ignorant!!!
Kevin
"The bible says to only worship god and no one else can make a day holy. Check yourself if you think it is ok to celebrate any man made holy day of any kind. If you are honest with yourself you may find your own hypocrisy that needs fixing"
Wow! Hey James Malm! Fancy seeing you here!
All kidding aside. Who said anything about making a day "holy"?
What then, is your definition of holiness - since holiness was not implied once in this article? We're talking about honoring the day of someone's - or something's - birth. We aren't talking about canonizing the day or attempting to justify holding a sacred convocation on such a day. Last I checked, no one dragged the portable Church-O-God traveling sound system and Halogen-Lit Lectern with the Corporate Seal to a birthday party!
If you really want to get technical with it, what do you think about the gatherings that the Church did to celebrate and honor things like the Auditorium? Church Anniversaries? The 50th Anniversary of the Plain Truth? I think someone above mentioned these things too. Or how about a pastor's 25th year of service with the Church when they gave them a nice - what was it - a Rolex Watch? Was that not celebrating the birth of an employee to the service of "the Work"? Was this making a day "holy" - with or without celebration? Where is the line drawn if one goes down the line with this?
Then you mention "Man-Made Holy Days". Obviously you're referring to days like Maundy Thursday, All-Saints Day, Palm Sunday, and the like. But I'm not talking about any of these religiously oriented days. I'm talking about a birthday. So, then, here's my question. How did you bump up a person's honored day of birth to the level of spiritual significance of days that certain denominations regard with christian significance? And if the birthdays got lumped in with those, what other days are you lumping in there too? The fourth of July? Thanksgiving? What a dull and boring, uneventful life you seem to be subscribing to!!
8:09, The Hebrew word translated "holy" is not a special religious word, it is a common word meaning "set apart" usually for some purpose. A fragment of a vessel with the inscription "holy to the king" was found in Jerusalem a few years ago. That vessel was set apart for the king. If I declare that no one may sit in my favorite chair except me, I have set apart my chair for myself; I have made it holy to me.
Anyone can set apart anything they wish, be it objects or time. God does not care about my chair or someone's birthday party. If you think he does, you must live in a very constrained world.
I remember as a naive youth reading HWA's "biblical" arguments for prohibiting birthday celebrations, but I never was fully convinced about it. It's like prohibiting masturbation and yet it's nowhere forbidden in the Bible. So basically as I understand it HWA inferred that because there were executions on the birthdays of Pharaoh and Herod that such automatically meant birthdays were forbidden in the Bible. And the passage of Job's children regularly getting together and later tragically dying was supposed to support this (mis)interpretation since HWA again inferred Job's children were celebrating birthdays. Thus, like a superstitious person HWA inferred that birthday celebrations were "verboten" because he inferred tragedies were associated with birthday celebrations in the Bible. It wasn't until I came across Keith Hunt's logical defense of birthday celebrations:
www.keithhunt.com/Birthdays1.html
www.keithhunt.com/Birthdays2.html
www.keithhunt.com/Birthdays3.html
www.keithhunt.com/Birthdays4.html
www.keithhunt.com/Birthdays5.html
that I finally rejected HWA's fallacious and biblically incorrect view. Like Hunt demonstrates if we're to shun birthdays because of the tragedies that occurred on Pharaoh's and Herod's birthdays then what about shunning Passover since our Saviour tragically died on that day?! It's a stupid and false association that smacks of silly superstition more than wisdom imo.
As I understood it..it was the bad things that occurred on these specific days that led to the
assumption that the events were the result of observing an "evil" day. John the baptist losing
his head on Herod's BD, Job's offspring being killed by a tornado while celebrating one of
their BD's, etc. Seemed to make a certain small degree of sense at the time, being still
biblically ignorant & "unchurched." Live & learn..."too soon old & too soon smart".
That anti-birthday doctrine was borrowed lock, stock and barrel from the JW's. When I was answering mail, someone sent in a Watchtower magazine. It had an article denouncing birthdays and it was almost word for word the article that Ken Herrmann put out in the Plain Truth. He plagiarized the whole thing. I don't know exactly when that plagiarized doctrine came in but it was the thing when I got involved in the mid-fifties.
I think it is a sin to pin a tail to a donkey!
In victorian times the 40 man staff and household would go out of their way for a lavish party teaching the young lady and master etiquette for the enjoyment of their status in later years.
With the introduction of age grades in schools the party became limited to children of the same age group.
By the 1920's mothers had few staff left and took kids to a theater, out or cinema. By 1950 the custom became mainstream. This is the time when hwa condemned it. Because anything mainstream or change is suspect. I mean the beatles, long haired rebels named after an insect. How clear can communism get in workers overthrowing civil society as god intended.
Gods purpose is an agricultural, rural, unchanging society with the main trading desks and means of communication, trade journals in chicago in the midwest. The gold standard. (Admonished to Follow the yellow brick road ( gold standard) to KANSAS. And a senator from Kansas ordering the preservation of the entire broadcasting legacy of wcg.
Dorothy, Garner, follow the yellow brick road to the land of oz. Pasadena as the city made great by the big men from the midwest and chicago and the ladies from chicago have a rose parade in their summer residences at the end of the rainbow (railroad, oregon trail) in the golden land of oz.
What what, what did you say about the catholic haciendas, zorro and the apaches? Please stick to the script. Aplause.....music stops. Wall is built.
Nck
In the 60's at SEP in Orr, MN, a girl in my dorm received a birthday card from her mom on her birthday. Of course, her parents were elders in Pasadena and she went to Imperial. So goes the hypocrisy of the WCG. When I had my own kids, I had birthdays for my kids, and I have not been struck by any lightening bolts thus far!
Post a Comment