Techniques of Cult Figures
2) Hope: The hook within all cultic messages is a promise of hope.
3) Mysticism: HWA sowed his own personal brand of mysticism, in which he claimed to be a latter-day Paul/John-the-baptist, the recipient of personal revelation direct from Jesus Christ and "a voice crying out in the wilderness," the chosen vessel to prepare the way for the coming of the messiah.
4) Confidence: That he was able to muster the appearance of utter certainty was a crucial part of HWA 's seductive power. We had confidence in his confidence. It is the same effect that all confidence men have on their victims.
5) The Myth of Infallibility: Through his mystical connection with Jesus Christ, HWA crowned himself with a halo of infallibility.
6) The "Father Knows Best" Myth: We were always told not to lean to our own understanding, but to trust in the Hebrew God. But that was the same as saying to trust in Herbert Armstrong and his ministers over and above any trust you should have in your own faculties.
7) The “Special People" Myth: We who had responded were sleepers who had been predestined by god to trigger on HWA’s message, receive supernatural esoteric knowledge, and then go on to reach our mystical "human potential" as kings and priests in a soon-coming utopian society.
8) The "If Only He Knew" Myth: HWA was a distant, godlike figure, above the squabbles of everyday life, so it became possible for us to dislike particular ministers we dealt with, and yet still respect Herbert Armstrong. I don't know how many times I heard, "Yes, if Mr. Armstrong could do everything himself, some things would be different, but he can't keep a watch on everything." This myth allowed us to gloss over the abusive aspects of the WCG and acted as a safety valve in the system, protecting HWA's image.
9) No Rational Justification: HWA’s message made us feel like we were special, so we pinned our hopes upon it. But when disconfirming evidence arose providing rational reasons to disbelieve, like in 1972, instead we insulated ourselves from reality with irrational justifications like, "He's still right, but his timing is 'a little off.'"
10) Sense of Entitlement: HWA’s co-worker letters from the 30's always implied that his "work" should be more important that you, than your marriage, your children, your solvency, or anything else. He felt entitled to tell people what clothes to wear, whether they can wear makeup or not, when to divorce their spouses, etc.
Herbert Armstrong set himself up as a cult figure in order to abuse people for his own financial and narcisstic purposes, and took advantage of the same myths that benefitted other cults. "If only Mr. Armstrong knew, things would be different," shielded him from the responsibility for the abuses he was actively perpetrating.
The fact is, if Mr. Armstrong did not know about a particular abusive episode perpetrated by his church upon you or your family, then thank your lucky stars, because if he had known, and could have changed things, he wouldn't have righted any wrongs, he would have done an even better job, and it would have been even worse!
From When the Sabbath Was Fun comment
90 comments:
?Mysticism: HWA sowed his own personal brand of mysticism, in which he claimed to be a latter-day Paul/John-the-baptist, the recipient of personal revelation direct from Jesus Christ and "a voice crying out in the wilderness," the chosen vessel to prepare the way for the coming of the messiah"
You just described the real John the Baptist and Apostle Paul as well, which is why people copy and claim them as their own to underpin their own claims of authority.
D.D. said: "You just described the real John the Baptist and Apostle Paul"
Apostle Paul also demonstrates the hazards of eschatological-apocalypicism:
Promising a Utopian Millennium is "just around the corner":
The only Millennium Christianity has thus far delivered is the Dark Ages (years 500-1500)
Paul and John the Baptist were involved in a much different "credentialing process" than HWA. Diehl's comparison is inapt.
The glaring omission in this list is any culpability that the respondents to HWA's marketing gambit might have had. If it were all as one sided as this is presented, HWA would have taken the entire nation by storm. Instead he had a small and insignificant church - a footnote in history, if that. You might start with the fact that most of us were stupid.
One can find a NT scripture credited to the Apostle Paul especially in every one of those points. Paul's mysticism was blatant from ascending to the third heaven to see things he can't tell anyone about (uh huh) to "Follow me as I follow Christ" which meant as he defined him which was differently than the Jerusalem Apostle did. Paul motivated the church with his own versions of "soon" and eye twinklings as well as disrupted family life advising against marriage and such because of the shortness of time, which was not true as we know.
I spare us...
Your 10 points are spot on!
However, I think you missed a couple of vital ones that are necessary for Cult Figures...
*** The need to have a "villain" or "bad guy". The World, Satan, Dissidents, Liberals, Rebels, etc.
*** The urgency that the movement is "Saving the World from destruction", that is imminent without their/our intervention.
The Book is the problem and has every example, practice, admonition, rule and command to "obey those who have rule over you for they keep watch over you " Heb 13:7, in it that can be used and expected to be a part of a modern ministry. To replicate the NT Apostles and for some the OT prophets is vital to a success sell of those who claim True Church status. The Book gives them every permission to do so. They don't make this stuff up and there is nothing new in anything HWA and the WCG splinters do or claim they can do that the Bible does not encourage them expect to be or happen.
What happens is that after years of copying the Biblical admonitions and behaviors and seeing they cause nothing but problems, do not meet expectations or remotely "work" in real life, producing a loss of faith over time, along with not a little bit of bitterness and skepticism, organized religion becomes the oxymoron it apparently is.
And now to work rubbing people the right way.... :)
NO2HWA - you are absolutely wonderful - thank you!!!!
Gordon Feil said...
"I may be wrong, but i have long had the impression that such abuses as described here were not promoted by Herbert Armstrong. He was more liberal about such things. I think local ministers/kooks set their own style."
Case study: As the title of this post suggests, more than 33 years later, Gordon Feil is still being "manipulated by Herbert Armstrong." All these years later he's still busy protecting Herbert Armstrong's image and glossing over the many abuses he perpetuated.
Thanks Tonto, you're right. It's not a list I came up with myself, but rather one that I adapted from "The Dark Charisma of Adolf Hitler," and couldn't help but notice that I was personally familiar with them already, just not from history class, but from WCG. Same things apply to the personality cult that is the republican party now as well.
Near_Earth_Object said...
Paul and John the Baptist were involved in a much different "credentialing process" than HWA. Diehl's comparison is inapt.
No, twas the same credentialing process as HWA and others in Guru type religions. Their credentialing was delusional and a response to the voices in their heads common to those who need credentials in religion but expect others to just believe that "and yes Brethren, I am an Apostle." The folk in Ephesus kicked Paul's ass out finding him to be one who claimed to be an Apostle but was not, at least I suspect. All of Asia certainly did not believe Paul was legit.
Right, John the Baptist is basically a Wildman who heard the voice of God in his head, dressed down for the job and ate locusts and honey. Paul on the other hand, sees a blinding light, falls off his ass and gets the call from a post dead Jesus. While with others, no one can get his story straight. This calling was hearsay and we'd not take this seriously today if someone came up with this story about themselves any more than Paul also saying he was taken up to the third heaven. These are simply religious delusions by those who claim them and could never be proven to be true. Mental wards are full of this stuff. These are the signs of temporal lobe epilepsy however but that's for another day.
At Acts 9:3-8, Paul was blinded by a light and fell down, then heard Jesus, who told Paul that he would be told what to do when he was in the city. His men did not see the light, but heard the voice. They remained standing.
At Acts 22:6-11, Paul told the people he was blinded by a light and fell down, then heard Jesus, who again told Paul that he would be told what to do when he was in Damascus. This time, his men saw the light but, unlike Paul, were not blinded, and did not hear the voice.
At Acts 26.13-19, Paul told Agrippa that he saw a brilliant light and heard Jesus, who gave him his mission, but did not command him to go to Damascus. He fell down, but there is no mention of blindness, nor is there any mention of the men seeing or hearing anything, although for some reason they also fell down. He told those at Damascus and Jerusalem about his conversion experience.
In Galatians Paul does not recall this tale that Luke seems to make up in Acts. Paul simply says he was called from the womb which would be like Jeremiah and Jesus thus showing Paul's Dave Pack like qualities in exaggeration and specialness.
It's not inapt. It's the same thing.
Diehl-
The inaptness, as I see it, is to be found in the fact that you are a materialist and not a Christian. As a Christian, I see all of the scriptures you cited from a very different and traditional perspective. Not the view nouveau with a sour twist you attempt to construct. Reading your opinion, to me as a Christian, is like watching that Ancient Aliens series on the History Channel. It seems like, for every archaeological object, the regulars on the show can find an ancient alien related explanation no matter how gratuitous.
The real issue is at the "trunk of the tree." Is materialism a valid interpretation of reality? If materialism does not rise to that level and Christian theism carries the day, your viewpoints are inane. We can debate what happened to Paul ad infinitum without resolution.
In any event, if you hope to equate Paul with HWA, yours will be a lonely place in the religious melee.
Did you get that, Dennis?
NEO has stereotyped you as a "materialist."
Yes, NEO has decreed that anything a "materialist" thinks, under no circumstances has any possibility of "rising to the level" of leading to any interpretations that could be correct or have any value.
In fact, NEO has decreed that theism has carried the day. And not just any brand of theism, mind you, christian theism has carried the day!
He knows this is all true as true can be because reasons.
Therefore, all "materialists" can just be written off.
Our views, every last view of every last one of us, are all "inane."
The infallible NEO has spoken.
And that means that everything we have to say is "inapt," simply by definition. Nothing we have to say could possibly be correct or have any value.
Runs afoul of so many fallacies, I don't know where to even start!
Can you just spare us and go back to hanging out at Gavin's blog instead? Kthxbai!
NEO wrote:
The real issue is at the "trunk of the tree." Is materialism a valid interpretation of reality?
Why did Paul write that the material world provides sufficient evidence to discern the divine? This hasn't worked for Dennis, nor for many others. It is rare for someone to begin as a materialist and then come to theism. Much more common is to start at theism and then interpret the material world as God's creation. For that matter, it is much more common to find that close study of the physical world leads people away from the Bible than toward it. Then again, close study of the Bible also produces a great deal of agnosticism and atheism. The people who fit the NEO/Paul paradigm seem to be those who read the Bible and accept it unthinkingly, rather than those who think hard about what they read and see.
I get it 409 lol. I am a materialist because, according to the double split experiment, it takes observation to collapse the wave function into material objects and an observer I am so my world is of materials and matter, not that it matters. I do realize with NEO I simply can't compete in the all knowing category and must simply be content with the labels given me. Jeez, the guy can't even call me Dennis He calls me "Diehl" so I suppose I need call him "Object" but that sounds materialistic. :)
Dennis:
If I have mislabeled you, I apologize. I was basing this on the fact that you seem to emphasize your concern with physical evidence. What would you, then, label yourself? Atheist is a privative label - it tells us what you are not. You are not a theist. What are you then positively?
409:
You can start by reading my post. From what you have stated in your unique way, I gather you did not.
We get article after article by Dennis Diehl whose intend is to discredit belief in the existence of God and the bible. But no, that's not enough. He has to hijack this article with the title "How we were manipulated by Herbert Armstrong" into another God/bible bashing post. This frequent hijacking is over the top.
It's typical minister behavior.
Labels, labels, labels! They end up just being a matter of personal convenience in keeping everything sorted out. But I guess in a way it’s like hippies. People have told me that they never realized that they were a hippie until someone else called them that.
BB
7:37 Dennis did not post this, I did and I also gave it the title for the posting. If you want to write an article post please feel free to contact me.
BB:
In this case, it is more than a convenient moniker. To say someone is a materialist has philosophical content. It is like a label but it identifies a useful category that makes discussion easier.
I deduced from Diehl's past writing that he was a materialist of some sort. That is why I used the term. Its not a big deal. I am a Christian theist and I don't mind if other people know that. Some people don't like to wear a patch but we all really do. There is a possibility that Diehl has never thought about where he fits in the realm of philosophy and, hence, has no class designation he feels comfortable with. In that case, he may be something other than a materialist but I am speaking to those materialist statements he has made in the past.
I appreciated the article from Anonymous as it was thought-provoking.
Techniques of Cult Figures (my comments in parens)
1) Connection With a Mass Audience:
(Some cults start small... one true believer to start. Some become mass - but can still be dangerous even small.)
2) Hope: The hook within all cultic messages is a promise of hope.
(*always a promise, empty promise)
3) Mysticism:
(Not always Biblical. There are magic tricks, numerology, 'vitamin deficiency' supplement sales trick... or just promises of some profit or a change.)
4) Confidence:
(certainty, all confidence men promise.)
5) The Myth of Infallibility...
(see 4, and NEO's comment [gullibility, not imo stupidity. I knew some brilliant, but very misinformed people.])
6) The "Father Knows Best"
(Misogyny and internalized misogyny, programmed previously, spark and keep this alive.)
7) The “Special People" -
('special' and leaving others behind to suffer, a problem imo. If one is Special, Strong,
best not to preach, bully, annihilate or abandon those with weaknesses.
Sounds like a hook for malignant narcissists, not Christians.)
8) The "If Only He Knew"
(Eh, he knew things we didn't. And some knew things HWA didn't. Maybe corporate sole tax fraud, maybe the sin of rock music.)
9) No Rational Justification: "He's still right...'"
(nothing to add... is just sad)
10) Sense of Entitlement: HWA’s co-worker letters from the 30's always implied that his "work" should be more important that you, than your marriage, your children, your solvency, or anything else. He felt entitled to tell people what clothes to wear, whether they can wear makeup or not, when to divorce their spouses, etc.
(that's pretty entitled, and it was authoritarianism so those 'at the top' felt entitled ... but the 'etc.' went much further... pretty much everything was under scrutiny.
Consider, a college where all coeds were instructed they *had* to accept a date with *any* male related to the church, who asked them out, teaching entitlement to all church men.
Where does that happen?? in this country, anyway. Does anyone here think that's a little oppressive?)
-----------------------------------------------------
"Tonto said...
"Your 10 points are spot on!
"However, I think you missed a couple of vital ones that are necessary for Cult Figures...
"*** The need to have a "villain" or "bad guy". The World, Satan, Dissidents, Liberals, Rebels, etc.
"*** The urgency that the movement is "Saving the World from destruction", that is imminent without their/our intervention. "
------------------------------------------------------
Tonto, thanks, these two are also important, imo.
Is distracting to focus all on the 'bad guy'.
And, focusing on 'Life is Short!!' or 'End is Nigh'
"Quick, do what I want you/everyone to do!!!" is to be ignored, in sales of any kind.
There are many 'bad guys' to consider... or whatever someone wants to call them. And good ones to learn from.
Maybe what one is doing, is exactly what one wants/needs to be doing.
Appreciated the article and will continue thinking about it.
Back to the conversation here.
HWA would have studied the techniques used by Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini. Presumably, newspaper and magazine articles of his era frequently had articles on this.
Another point is that Herb used 'dog whistles' which conveyed to ministers and thugs his intentions while having plausible deniability. Hence church tyranny was sanctioned with his frequent "government is everything," verbal murder was OKed with his " beware of the evil of self esteem" and slavery to the church was conveyed with his "nothing else matters but the work."
Voilà, unlike Dennis, I stayed on topic.
Near_Earth_Object said...
Dennis:
If I have mislabeled you, I apologize. I was basing this on the fact that you seem to emphasize your concern with physical evidence. What would you, then, label yourself? Atheist is a privative label - it tells us what you are not. You are not a theist. What are you then positively?
409:
You can start by reading my post. From what you have stated in your unique way, I gather you did not. "
Perhaps I missed something. I do emphasize physical evidence because, to me now, physical evidence is what the scientific method of discovery does and only can deal with. Science can't prove God as God is not wont to step into a test tube and turn litmus paper blue.
I don't have a "label" as such I suppose for myself. I am just me. When you answer the question, "without telling me anything good or bad about yourself, who are you?" Ultimately you can only end up with "I am me" Each of us unique in the Universe actually with tendencies to join groups of like minded or to seemingly crave community, which in the past was how one survived. It also helps a lot today of course to have community. Just not the kind that control over much or fill one's head with nonsense required for membership and belonging.
I don't understand your separating atheist as what I am from a label unless you mean it in terms of who anyone is. Again, I am just me as you are just you.
In the world of religion, and having soaked in it most of my life, I no longer believe in a god or any other magical and invisible beings. Science fills in the god of the gaps more every day just as fossils fill in the gaps between those already known to show us the beautiful picture of the evolution of all life including ourselves. Humans are conscious apes and chimps are our cousins as they say and is actually true. I don't believe in the super natural and , to date, have never seen any evidence for it. Stories and myths in books don't convince. I used to say that "experience is the best teacher but the tuition is high" as if experience were not preferable to just being lead and told. However, my experience is that personal experience is the only teacher and the rest is just hearsay.
At any rate, the religious mind, both the sincere one and the deviant one have always fascinated me. OF course, good science, cosmology, paleontology, geology are where my heart is and always was. WCG sidetracked me as a kid and it was the 60's. My religious self got in the way of my career choice self and what I'd love to be and do on the planet while I can.
Anything I write or post on Banned is only meant to inform and perhaps encourage thinking outside the WCG/Church of God box, view of the Bible and mentality we ALL share. I know this group's mindset and background of course well. I soaked in it along with us all and unfortunately I overly promoted it thinking it was my youthful calling.
Too soon old and all that.... However, for me, is was not to late to do what I enjoy doing and be with who I love being with.
7:37pm, Just how is it hijacking an article if Dennis posts first and then the next few comments are aimed at him?
Gary, 7:37pm didn't say that Dennis wrote this specific article, in fact if you read what 7:37pm said he makes the distinction between all the articles that you post of Dennis' and this one which he falsely claims Dennis hijacked.
7:37pm said "We get article after article by Dennis Diehl.......But no, that's not enough. He has to hijack this article......."
Obviously 7:37pm is unable to comprehend that this blog belongs to you and he/she is perfectly free to not read it, and you are free to post what you want. I've had many comments not posted by you but I understand that I don't have to be here, I guess I enjoy self-inflicted torture.
No wonder there's so much arguing on this blog, the majority of the participants lack reading comprehension skills.
The problem that I see with so many who were once part of the WCG experience is that yes, you all "soaked in it" but you didn't really understand it (The bible, not WCG doctrines).
From what I can tell no one who left, and no one who has the need to join an ad or organization, ever really understood. The only ones that I've found who seems to have understood are those of us in the independent movement, and not all in that movement truly understand. Yeah, yeah, I know, understanding is subjective. Whatever. The only ones who I've found who really understand the bible are the anti-denominationalists.
We don't need a man to follow, nor an organization. We are truly free in Christ. That's where I've been for over 25 years which makes it difficult for me to understand all the harping by former members against Pack, Malm, Thiel, etc. etc. They didn't force you to join their cult, You were a big girl or boy. You chose to follow them when many of your former acquaintances in the WCG were holding on to Christ, the Sabbath, the Feasts, the being born into the God family, keeping the "baby" but were throwing out the dirty water of following a man, a supposed clergy class, and an organization. I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who chose to follow any man when it was abundantly clear 30 years ago or longer that it was wrong.
4:14 wrote: "Obviously 7:37pm is unable to comprehend that this blog belongs to you and he/she is perfectly free to not read it, and you are free to post what you want. I've had many comments not posted by you but I understand that I don't have to be here, I guess I enjoy self-inflicted torture.
No wonder there's so much arguing on this blog, the majority of the participants lack reading comprehension skills."
This blog gets hit with hundreds of spam emails a day from China, Russia and computer bots that cannot form complete or logical sentences. Rare are those that I don't let through. The Nazi worshipping, anti-Semitic and vitriolic comments also don't get through, though these only come from a couple of people. Sometimes I may not let something through if it is entirely off topic and has no meaning whatsoever on the topic at hand, while other times the train gets to run freely off track because the topic is of great interest.
As for Dennis and the things he writes, you are correct that the comprehension level is low at many times. Never once have I seen anyone try and disprove what he writes with logic and a willingness to share in mutual conversations. Instead, they attack Dennis personally. It is a sad person who feels Dennis, myself or anyone else here that has left Armstrongism is "destroying" someone's faith. If that actually happens the faith foundation of the person was already weak or nonexistent. It is much easier to spout party lines and sound bites from church publications and sermons than it is to be willing to be challenged as to what one believes.
The Bible, God, and religion are all eternally fascinating to me. I can not stay away, even after living through the crap of Armstrongs\ism. It has not and cannot turn me off. Since 2005 I have been part of an international program that is a 4-year process of studying the Bible, church history and how to put faith into action in today's multicultural world. It is fascinating to see peoples eyes wake up to things regarding the Bible and the things religious leaders have spoon fed people. I am now the coordinator of the Los Angeles region with over 200 people enrolled at this moment.
I let others post here because they are also working through their process fo what it means to them to leave the silliness of so much that what was Armstrongism behind. I certainly do not agree with them at times, but also know that many need a platform to share as the various splinter groups sink further and further into dark depravity.
If people don't like this blog then people don't have to read it. 6.7 million hits later prove that there are some who do like it.
Anon 4:34 AM wrote:
The problem that I see with so many who were once part of the WCG experience is that yes, you all "soaked in it" but you didn't really understand it
With the above, you have demonstrated that YOU are one of those who never really understood Jesus Christ's message. You show neither understanding of, nor compassion for, the thousands of us who were born into Armstrongism. Yes, we could leave behind our parents' organizations and beliefs when we became adults, and most of us did exactly that. However, our formative years were damaged not just by the organization, but by the way individual adults judged our observance of the Fifth Commandment in homes where as minors we could not be "independent" or "anti-denominationalism." You as an adult could invent your own "non-denominational" Armstrongism, keeping most of his Bible teachings while rejecting his teachings about the church and government. If your heresy got noticed by the minister, nobody was going to give you 39 welt-inducing lashes across your back and butt.
I do not need your sympathy, and after reading your ignorant and heartless words I do not want it. For you, WCG/Armstrongism may all have been some kind of mind-game that fed your ego, but for many of us it was a very painful "truth."
Disprove what Dennis writes? How? How can one disprove what one can see with his/her own eyes? When Dennis sticks to what can be physically proven there's no way to disprove him, it's when he goes off on what can't be proven is when things get redundant. Just as God can't be proven, much of science is guesswork and can't be proven.
This last weekend I was at the Houston Museum of Natural History, a lot of interesting guesswork. They find a few bones/fossils and attempt to piece them together trying to form what they think lived here billions of years ago. What they don't tell you is that the majority of what you see recreated is just theory.
Dennis matter of factly writes like everything that science theorizes is 100% true, but theory is merely things that haven't been disproven. How can anyone prove or disprove the age of the universe? How can anyone prove or disprove when dinosaurs lived or how man "evolved" from a single celled organism? So what would be the purpose in "disproving" Dennis?
We can disprove Dennis no more than he can disprove the bible. Neither can be proven nor disproven, both sides rely on faith.
I've often gotten a kick out of how those against the bible claim that hundreds of virgin born, dying and resurrecting saviors existed long before Jesus was ever born, but they have no evidence of this.
What they do have are ancient carvings from long before Jesus with the names of various gods carved into them, but with no specifics about what they believed. Then they find writings from the 2nd century CE, or the third century CE which talk about how these gods were worshipped, how they were virgin born, died and raised from the dead and they conclude this is exactly what they believed 500 or more years earlier. It's all lies. Written as fact in order to deceive.
I've asked many times from those who claim such things, show me evidence written before Christ that a savior was virgin born, died and rose again.
If you can show me anything written BCE that shows this then I'll more than willingly question the Jesus story, but merely showing me the name of a god written on ancient stone, then relying on more recent texts to tell me what they believed, just won't cut it.
My sister and brother in law fell for this shit. They no longer believe in Jesus because they lack critical thinking skills. Show me the proof!
5:13am Your emotional rant reveals a lot. For your information I too grew up in the WCG, my parents started just months before my third birthday in 1967.
Maybe you should blame your parents on those welts and not the organization. Yeah, I got spanked as a child but not the 40 minus one, my parents were too intelligent/loving to resort to such cruelty even if the denomination taught it.
If you have a victim mentality you'll always be a victim. Grow up and own your pain.
You're quite right, when it comes to ignorance, I'm heartless.
5:13am One more thing, which of Jesus' messages didn't I get?
When he tore into the money changers at the Temple?
When he killed a tree for not having fruit on it that he could eat?
When he drowned a herd of innocent pigs?
When he called a bunch of self righteous jerks white washed sepulchres, snakes, etc.?
Which Jesus do you insist that I represent? The effeminate one that mainstream christianity tries to pawn off on us?
Anon 4:34, Some of us weren't initially in the WWCG by choice, our parents made that choice for us. At no time was I ever given the choice to attend or not, it was expected and demanded of us to follow along. I left at 18. My spouse did not give me a choice about his joining up with RCG. He did it against any objections I presented to him. I presented specifics of what Pack was teaching that went against what the NT taught and I was totally ignored. I don't agree with everything on this site but it lets me know that I am not alone in the world either and others also have issues with things as well.
2:04 AM said:
"HWA would have studied the techniques used by Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini. Presumably, newspaper and magazine articles of his era frequently had articles on this.
"Another point is that Herb used 'dog whistles' which conveyed to ministers and thugs his intentions while having plausible deniability. Hence church tyranny was sanctioned with his frequent "government is everything," verbal murder was OKed with his " beware of the evil of self esteem" and slavery to the church was conveyed with his "nothing else matters but the work."
Voilà, unlike Dennis, I stayed on topic."
This is interesting. Are you saying 'ministers who are also thugs' or 'the ministers, and the thugs'?
Also, what is 'verbal murder'?
(I think I may have known well the last. Just seems too important to gloss over in this mix of comments.)
How many ministers (goes w/o saying, but noting, all male) learned the art of 'dog whistles.' The topic, well researched and articulated, with examples, could be an interesting article to discuss and learn about.
6:28am, as I said, I too grew up in the WCG from two years old in 1967. Why people assume that I was an adult who merely joined WCG I don't understand. Yes I do, they're letting their emotions rule them.
My formative years in the WCG were in the 70's, I wasn't beaten as many claim happened to them. My point is, who was really to blame, the cult, or the parents? Even if the parents were told by the cult to spank the evil out of the kids, who's really to blame? Especially if there were parents in the church who didn't follow those demands?
I'm not giving the cult a pass. WCG and HWA and his minions were pure evil imo, but a poor childhood should be blamed on the parents.
@ 10:17pm - great comments!
NO2HWA - is this the group?
https://www.communitybiblestudy.org/
No, it is Education for Ministry. Its been around 40 years and well over 70 thousand people have graduated from the program around the world. Over 20,000 are currently enrolled in the U.S and Canada. http://efm.sewanee.edu
@6:15am
OMG - really?
Why do you feel so personally threatened by someone else's experience, which may have differed from yours? Yes, it threatens you - which is obvious by the way you respond. Their experiences do not have to any connection with yours so why make it so? No one is saying anything against your own parents.
There were a lot of kids growing up in the WCG who did not experience the same level of punishment that other kids did. However, there were certainly many who lived under very strict circumstances with severe punishments that would not have occurred if their parents had not been influenced by the WCG.
You can appreciate your good fortune in having parents who were less influenced by some of the WCG more excessive policies without being so harsh to others who did not have the same benefit. However, you shouldn't expect everyone's experience to be measured against your own. The WCG was excessive and unbelievably harsh in its policies, which they implemented - that's just a fact.
And this victim thing - I know, I know...people don't want to be a victim. I paid a huge price because I grew up in the WCG. Call it what you will, but I lost huge chunks of my life and Thomas Wolfe was right, 'you can't go home again'. But I'm also incredibly fortunate that I faced things head on over 30 years ago, and have plenty to be thankful for. I doubt if there are any people who view me as a victim - not knowing what I experienced growing up in the WCG.
That doesn't mean I'm going to stop talking about what happened to me when I feel like it. Hell, it was a part of my life and no one is going to try and shut me up about it.
Dennis:
I appreciate your response. I agree with you that we all have our own "deep philosophy" or way of interpreting reality. We can clump together with others with similar ideas but the class is never really homogenous.
My referring to you as a materialist is clearly a narrow and inadequate definition of your deep philosophy but this term can serve as a working definition for discussion. This is based on the following points that you made:
1. You emphasize physical evidence. Other statements you make indicate that you exclude the supernatural or anything that transcends physical evidence. So you not only "emphasize" physical evidence, in effect, you believe that the physical is all there is.
2. The scientific method, which deals only with physical evidence, is for you the only acceptable and credible process of discovery.
I regard the term "atheist" as a vague descriptive label because it only states a negative, like saying "I am a non-Democrat." This immediately suggests the question: "Then what are you?" I assume that most atheists are somewhere in the materialist spectrum because of their predilection to recruit Science to their cause.
As a Christian theist, I totally disagree with you. But it is useful to reflect on those issues that you raise.
NO@HWA stated: "Never once have I seen anyone try and disprove what he writes with logic and a willingness to share in mutual conversations."
I have numerous times presented logical arguments. Most recently on the topic of the absurdity of mechanistic materialism. And I assume "to share in mutual conversations" is why anybody contributes to this blog.
7:20 AM
10:17 here, saying thanks!
7:18 said "WCG and HWA and his minions were pure evil imo, but a poor childhood should be blamed on the parents."
WCG and HWA and the minions incited and provided fuel. I heard the horrifying Waterhouse threats turned on children at home, and yet heard the more balanced minions preach on a kinder/gentler way of parenting.
Pretty sure that constant reinforcing though, can exacerbate narcissistic malignance, that draws some to a harsh church.
No need to excuse the church and only blame parents. It can be a toxic mix.
Not exactly what one would seek in a church or community. Takes a while to sort it all out and see it for what it is.
Since Dennis so generously used my post in one of his articles I guess I better fix what my autocorrect changed without my noticing. In my 4:34am comment it said:
"From what I can tell no one who left, and no one who has the need to join an ad or organization,"
Autocorrect placed "ad" where I had acog, so it should read:
"From what I can tell no one who left, and no one who has the need to join an acog or organization,"
Thanks again Dennis for allowing me to point out that when I wrote that I fully "understood" that "understanding" is subjective.
Thanks ol' buddy!
8:05 The mere idea that I can shut you up on a blog that I don't own is hilarious. Actually your entire post reveals that you are ruled by emotions and not logic. I never once responded to you personally until you wrote to me, commenting on what I said. If you don't want someone to show you where you're mistaken then don't respond to them. Once you respond don't act like they're trying to shut you up if they show you just where your emotionalism falters. If your parents beat you because of what a man told them to do then no, it's not that mans fault, it's your parents fault.
Grow up!
"However, there were certainly many who lived under very strict circumstances with severe punishments that would not have occurred if their parents had not been influenced by the WCG."
You don't know that to be fact, which is why I say blame the parents. I have cousins who were physically and emotionally abused and their parents were never part of WCG.
Again, you're letting your emotions influence what you're reading here. You think I'm writing because I feel threatened? What a laugh. I'm writing because I found freedom a long time ago and the first thing one needs to do to find that is get rid of the anger. It's one thing to point out what happened it's another to sit here and blame others for what your parents did.
I'm done. Wallow in your misery all that you want, I'm past arguing about it.
4.14 AM
Many peoples comments have not being posted because the blog owner deemed them off topic. But not so with Dennis. No matter the topic, Dennis hits the reader with his "the bible is a fairy tale written by mentally sick men." If he wants to write articles dedicated to this belief, fine. He has done so on many occasions. In these cases, readers can choose to not read his articles. But when he weaves this belief into every article written by others, the choice isn't there. And his comments being off topic is tolerated.
As far as I'm concerned, Dennis is using repetition to brainwash readers into accepting his point of view. It's a ACOG favorite technique, and disrespectful of readers intellectual independence.
Many on this blog have theirs favourite viewpoints which they often express. But it's understood that a line shouldn't be crossed least one enter brainwashing territory.
Everyone adheres to this, but not Dennis. I assume it's a carry over from his minister days.
10:20am, and the readers on this blog have proven themselves to be easily brainwashed. Lol
Give me a break, Dennis' name is written on all his articles and as far as I know his comments, so you're not forced to read his musings. I'm sure he posts anonymously at times so we'll just have to acknowledge some might be against your will, but your arguments against Dennis posting on this blog is hilarious. Again, it's Gary's choice, it's his blog. Gary posted one of my comments and then deleted it, it was my comment to NCK about guns. I didn't whine, other than wondering why he posted it in the first place. I understand though that it most likely got through without his knowing. I really don't care, he can post what he wants and delete what he wants, it's his puppy to do what he wills.
From now on I'll sign my posts,
Don't mistake me as someone who cares.
ps Many of you already know who I am I'm sure.
Anon 9:48,
Not saying you are doing this, but some act as if emotions are counter to logic. Just because someone presents an argument that includes an effect on their emotion does not make the argument illogical.
Not all parents followed the same discipline training, but Byker Bob, the "when the sabbath was fun" poster, and several of the anonymous posters on this post have described their parents becoming abusive AFTER attending with the WCG. That indicates culpability on the WCG as "but for the teaching of WCG this abuse would not have occurred". That can be debated, but it seems likely to me.
The parents also receive blame, but WCG was a cult and once in the cult we know that it has a strong effect on most in the cult, or they wouldn't be there. Wallowing in victimhood is not the answer of course, but I believe our Lord would sympathize with the hurt endured by many due to the WCG.
4.14 AM
Many peoples comments have not being posted because the blog owner deemed them off topic.
That is not true at all. 98% of the comments are all put through. The spam is not. The antisemitic anti-Jewish bullshit is not. The poor little picked on Nazi's is not. And the racist comments are not. The post that I deleted the guns comments had absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic of the post. If you don't like it then don't read and comment. No one is forcing you to.
10.50 AM
No one has claimed that readers are easily brainwashed. That's a straw man argument. Brainwashing works, otherwise it would not be used by abusive cults, be they religious or secular. And especially by tyrannical banana republics.
"It's Gary's choice, it's his blog." So it's Herbs choice, it's his church. Sounds familiar? A blog owners property rights, gives him the legal right to be rational or irrational in the way he manages his blog. But there are natural consequences to this, such as readers going elsewhere.
Blog ownership is not a license to be above moral law, as you imply. Neither does it mean that blog owners have a right to be above moral evaluation. Why do I feel that I'm talking to a Herb minister?
Gary, I (the one who posted the gun comment) isn't the one who said:
"4.14 AM
Many peoples comments have not being posted because the blog owner deemed them off topic. But not so with Dennis."
Actually, I'm the one who said to the person who wrote that:
"Give me a break, Dennis' name is written on all his articles and as far as I know his comments, so you're not forced to read his musings."
and
"Again, it's Gary's choice, it's his blog."
and
"I understand though that it most likely got through without his knowing. I really don't care, he can post what he wants and delete what he wants, it's his puppy to do what he wills."
So if your last sentence was meant towards me, the one who posted the gun comment, then you really need some reading comprehension lessons yourself.
Don't mistake me for someone who cares!
12:43pm actually that was my claim, hence my statement. If you were part of WCG and then became a part of RCG, CCOG, UCG, COGWA then the evidence is quite clear that you are easily brainwashed.
Don't mistake me for someone who cares!
12:43 Just how did I imply that blog owners are above moral law? Don't make stupid comments and not expect to be challenged. Gary owns the blog and can post whoever's article that he wants and he doesn't have to get the readers permission. Just how did HWA get thrown into this? You have one messed up mind!
Don't mistake me for someone who cares!
"As far as I'm concerned, Dennis is using repetition to brainwash readers into accepting his point of view. It's a ACOG favorite technique, and disrespectful of readers intellectual independence."
Every sermon you ever heard is repetitive "brainwashing". People quote the Bible over and over and over until we all know what it says.
While I may repeat concepts, there is no ACOG favorite technique in it. I may repeat because it is RARE that anyone addresses the actual posting or even challenges observations made about Paul's role in the NT, Gospel origins and contradictions or even the mythological nature of many loved biblical stories. I can't think of one actually.
It gets off into the idiocy that I wrote it and that's usually the end of the actual posting or a meaningful discussion about it. If I have a goal at all, it is to expose people to ways of understanding the Bible other than literally and to address the absurdities we all should know better about. Perhaps being exposed to common mainstream theological and historical understanding of the Bible by those who make a life's work of exploring it is simply too much for the literalist mind to wrap itself around and certainly too threatening. Remember, I was one of you. We all have the same background in this.
PS The apologetics for what would actually happen if the earth stopped rotating as we are told it did twice in the OT so more folk could be slaughtered were hilarious btw. But refreshingly worth the discussion.
Gary is kinda of a special guy. He has hardly censored any of my postings. Only three or four times obviously mistaken or a bad night. :-)
Perhaps one time I understand why he allows Dennis alternative contribution while being involved in christian teaching himself.
I guess he has that same passion for free speech that I have, or at least the recognition for presentation of alternative opinion.
Aside from the bickering or alternative opinions there is a deep bond that connects some of the opponents here that even our spouses will never understand.
nck
They're still making excuses for him.
@9:48am - we can't pick and choose what we want to believe in order to state we are being logical. There has to be a basis for logic and your logic leaves out important, relevant facts.
I attended SEP in 1965, where a girl was hit 9 times every time she wet the bed. She ended up getting hit about 70 times during the 6-week period. When I went to the showers, I could see the bruises of the campers, which were many. And they were not restricted to just my dorm. A number of years later, a minister told me he ran away that year. I also heard that a camper called the police a couple of years after I attended.
And there were no parents participating in this.
1.06 PM
You put peoples comments through a blender, then answer to nothings that's being said. I give up.
"And there were no parents participating in this."
Really? And just who signed the permission papers for the kids to attend? Papers, which most likely had a clause giving permission to discipline.
Nope, no parents in any of this. You all keep making my points for me. LOL
Don't mistake me for someone who cares!
ps please note, I never said the cult wasn't at fault, what I'm saying is blame the parents who allowed the cult to turn them into terrible parents. Kudos to the parents (and there were many) who didn't fall for that shit!
@4:00pm - 'Don't mistake me for someone who cares!'
I don't. What baffles me is that someone who claims to have such loving parents could be so void of empathy. For someone who claims he is saying the WCG is not at fault, you sure are looking for reasons why the WCG would not be at fault and are very protective of it.
Interesting.
@4:44pm - Correction: For someone who claims he is never said the WCG was not at fault, you sure are looking for reasons why the WCG would not be at fault and are very protective of it.
So according to Dennis, we need experts telling us what the bible is really saying. But wait. There's disagreement among the experts. So we need experts telling us what the experts really mean. But again there's disagreement here. So again we need experts telling us what the experts of the experts really mean. Where would we be without all these experts.
Mysticism was only #3 on the list of cult tactics. A valid and important point.
Could have been an interesting discussion for those wanting to avoid further pitfalls, along with the other 9 + 2 added.
Are we witnessing the return of Kelvin McMillie?
This entire thread is utter and utter nonsense.
For those claiming the true believer hwa deceived them is just a horrendous excuse to their failure to thoroughlt study the topics as presented to them by hwa.
All the rest of them just believe of sufficiently proved to themselves that hwa was right regarding topics.
I am not taking sides here. Just acknowledging a certain laziness in my past and calling the complainers lazy asses too.
If anything HWA believed what he taught.
Take some responsibility for pitty sake. Although as a forner advertising executive I am ok with articles exposing certain tricks of the trade. Even if the level of exposure on this blog does not exceed that of the kiddies card trick or high hat and handkerchief from my perspective.
I do find Dennis make interesting observation of the Houdini boxes though but even his contributions do not reveal how the trick actually works since he does not believe in magic.
Nck
Ok ok. I can hear the comments coming so I will reveal the heart of magic.
It is not David Copperfield tricking a person. It is complete and utter self deception that is magic.
Thats one of the reasons I never fail to walk beneath the ladder of a windowwasher when I spot one. To defy the odds that the majority of self deceivers might ve right after all.
Nck
I will never retract my laziness accusation.
EVERYONE in wcg was well aware of the non racial mixing tradition. And the teaching that the earth was destroyed "because of "evil mixing". At the same time EVERYONE knew very well that "only 8 people had survived the flood."
Is this not the simplest of math as one out of a thousand, proving my point of self deception.
Nck
@7:06am
'If anything HWA believed what he taught.'
A person who sells knows that their ability to sell requires that they 'believe' in their product. They 'believe' as long as it is working.
I'm not buying that HWA duped himself. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been as successful as he was.
Anthropologists tell us that the different stages in the development of mankind overlapped. Assimilation was the final stage. People today exist who have Neanderthal genes. The Bible is Middle East-centric. Evidence we’ve learned about today suggests that if there was a flood, it was a local Mesopotamian event. If there was such a flood, and if it was due to corruption of genetics, it could have been due to the created “God conscious” beings descended from Adam and Eve intermarrying with Neanderthal and other earlier evolutionary species of mankind existing outside of the “known” world. Of course even that theory goes out the window when we can identify Neanderthal genes in some who are living today. That leaves us perhaps with the Nephilim, supposedly the by-products of angelic and human unions.
HWA had three of the four primary races (disrespecting and skipping red and going only to yellow, black, and white) coming as the by-products of the mixed marriages of Noah’s children). That does not make logical sense if one accepts that it was racial intermingling that had caused the flood in the first place. Had the goal been to press the reset button and to make the generations pure, then a generationally pure black couple would have been selected and saved, a generationally pure white couple, a generationally pure yellow couple, and a generationally pure red couple. Clearly, HWA’s well-documented racism influenced his concept of, and teaching of the flood. He also taught that during the 100 years required to build the ark, Noah and his sons were preaching a message urging repentance. How could one repent of having mixed genetics???
What we were taught about the flood at the hands of Armstrongism was clearly flawed, and used as a foundation for prejudice. We were also superficially taught that other cultures had traditions of a global flood (Gilgamesh) without proper expounding upon the Akkadian and Sumerian civilizations whose records were largely kept in clay rather than on animal skins and papyrus. Not only does clay have a much higher survival rate, but also these people were meticulous record keepers.
If our education was deficient in one area of our belief system, what does that say about all of the other areas? Yet, that is what naturally happens when we are attracted to a group which professes to have all the answers!
BB
Erm.
BB said it better.
I could delete my postings now and go on holiday to my planet tatooine. (not lying)
Nck
Nck claims that "I am not taking sides," then accuses Herbs victims of laziness and self deception. Yep, blame the victim. We all know from your many posts that you are guilty of idolatry by worshipping Herb. And like Herb, you believe that perception is everything. And the truth? 'What is truth,' as Pilate said.
Many members were relatively young when they came into the church. They still had the carry over beliefs from high school that the teacher is always right, the teacher is on your side, the teacher wants you to succeed, and your teacher is trustworthy.
Herb ruthlessly and heartlessly exploited these beliefs, making merchandise of his members. Herb, his minions and sympathizers are worthy of the greatest condemnation.
That's if one believes that life is precious.
1:36
I would take sides if I stated that hwa may have been mistaken.
I know he did not exploit. He believed it was the right way to go.
The rest is your problem.
Nck
Nck
When professional criminals are taught by the police, they feel that they are being victimised. That's because they believe and feel that they have the right to exploit others. So of course Herb felt that he didn't exploit. And like criminals, he believed that exploitation is the right way to go. Herb believed that one comes out on top by breaking Gods laws. He didn't believe that you reap what you sow applied to him. It applied to others, but not to him.
No, no Nck. It is you who has the problem.
2:38
HWA in many ways just followed the customs of the land that are complained about today. A funny book like missing dimension in sex was even pretty forward for a victorian. In the 18th century he probably wouldnt have had slaves though, because of the quaker stock.
Why do you change the subject to wether hwa was victimized, while I was clearly talking about you feeling victimized.
Is your mind warped or are you. just a disfunctional reader?
In both cases I would understand you becoming and remaining a victim status.
About 70 percent of responsders to my postings feel that they need to alter what I say. Thats why I have no empathy for their victimhood. It is as fake as their paraphrasing of what I supposedly said. It is just another cloak they assume before falling into the next trapping reality sets for them.
Nck
Nck
Herb did not feel that he exploited others, because like all victimizers, he felt it was his right to victimize. It is a common trait of victimizers.
So Herb and his worshippers like Nck will always see Herb as innocent. There has been a stream of articles on this blog documenting Herbs lies and abuse of power. For instance his non stop, over 40 years "we only have 3 - 5 short years left."
How can the leader of a 80 year old abusive cult be innocent??
@8:56pm
Nck - defending HWA but blaming the 'responders' for being deceived is a hybrid I am unfamiliar with and I must say, it is truly sad. Worshiping authority to that degree is very unhealthy.
There are basically two kinds of authority - there is an authority of entitlement or an authority of responsibility. Clearly, HWA created an organization of entitlement, which resulted in devastating outcomes for many people. HWA USED the Bible for that purpose.
Responsible authority considers the impact over who it is responsible for. If you can't take responsibility, then you have no business having authority.
Victims are an outcome, not the cause. You can find the causes on this website and many others, if you so choose. The fact that you won't consider them, is more of a testament to your laziness than any laziness by the 'responders'.
4:04
Some great points, really.
I have found that those feeling responsible for peoples "eternal" lives have different ethics as compared to those of the humanistic type.
Some even burnt their victims in order to save their souls.
Victimhood is a CAUSE for many future problems. Bear with me I am actually the ONLY oerson really saving souls if you would heed my call to avoid victimhood.
I hlame people who do not ask questions nor inform themselves regarding important decisions.
I blame the mortgage crisis on stupid people not on the bankers perse.
Nck
NCK, you're arguing with a person whose mind is completely void of any kind of logic. Time to let it go.
Nck, there are two or three anonymous posters on here who have shown themselves to be mentally unstable, I think you and 1:06pm have been dialoguing with one if not two of them.
10:14pm why are you being so childish? Kevin McMillen always had interesting posts, I for one miss him. Better than school yard quips!
Yeah, me too, 7/14@5:58. But, Kevin aspired to be an intellectual. Someone with a higher IQ called him on the fact that he is obviously not. Poor Kevin went into a meltdown, using some decidedly unChristian language on Gary in the process, and stormed off. That type of behavior negates credibility.
2:10pm I remember his defending Dennis from all the loonies here claiming Dennis was causing people to lose faith, and I remember his stance against anonymous posters who would complain about everything and how Gary reacted, defending the anonymous posters not understanding that all he was asking for was an identifier not their actual name. No wonder he got mad. Are you perfect?
As far as his "aspiring" to be an intellectual, I don't remember that, nor do I remember anyone with a higher IQ "calling him on the fact that he is obviously not". Could you please point me to the post where that person with the higher IQ did that? Thanks.
You know what you wrote and where it is, Kevin. I’m not going to waste my time looking up blog stuff from two months ago, because I’ve got more important catching up to do, like learning more about John Doe and Exene Cervenka and this summer’s X reunion tour.
Since I'm not Kevin you'll either have to waste your time or admit your 2:10 post isn't completely accurate.
1) I refuse to be baited into wasting my time for your convenience, and 2) unless you do, you won’t really know the truth. 3) I don’t really care if you know the truth, because I do!
Those are the only two threads that I can find. I can't find the one where Kevin got into it with Gary, but if these two are any indication, Kevin was right about anonymous posters not giving some way to identify themselves. Also I read nothing where some supposed "higher IQ person" showed Kevin that he wasn't an intellectual. Perhaps that person is delusional.
It looks like Kevin's not alone in his use of colorful language.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=226103369043606765&postID=492363147638601607
It looks like a bunch of 3rd graders having temper tantrums in the last few posts. Get over it already!
Come on! Third graders? You saying we’re both immature? He’s the one that’s being a poopy pants.
Ok guys. Its over now.
Your mums are here, back from the hairdressers. Wash your faces and hit for home, dinner is in the oven. And get rid of that dead possum.
And I will tell your mom too.
Nck
Well, I guess they've finally decided to kick back and have a metaphoric smoke!
LOL!
BB
Post a Comment