A reader here sent me this comment about Jeff Reed's recent article on Church of God International's website, The Dangers of Headline Theology.
Jeff Reed is really asking for it now by debunking headline theology. Not only are the Bill Watson minions within CGI going to be mad. But so are all the other Armstrong COGs who rely on headline theology to scare people into sending money.
Anyone who has spent even a minuscule amount of time in the Armstrong Church of God movement knows by now that headline theology is how the church operates. Headline theology is also the main method that the churches use to scare people into sending in every hard-earned dime they have.
Jeff Reed has become a rare breed in the church, kind of like Ian Boyne was. Here are some of the things he said:
“Headline theology” can be defined as searching out sensational headlines in the news upon which to base one’s biblical theology. Many supposed modern-day prophets find joy in connecting world events to their prophetic scenarios even though they continually are proven wrong and continue to move the goalposts of their predictions.
The COG over the decades has been filled with these types of ministers and church leaders. Today in the COG the biggest adherents of this theology are Dave Pack, Gerald Flurry, Bob Thiel, Ron Weinland, and Alton Billingsley. These men use headline theology to try and pump up their self-appointed "prophethood" status. That doesn't mean that lesser men like Gerald Weston, Victor Kubik, Jim Franks, and the leaders of other small COG groups don't do the same thing, it is just that they hide their adherence to this kind of theology undercover.
We in the Church of God International may occasionally look at world events and examine them through the lens of God’s law or prophecy. Still, we carefully avoid making dogmatic statements and identify our observations as speculation. Those who practice “headline theology” go much further. They may predict specific days or years as an absolute fulfillment of prophesied events. Or they may suggest that the end is only a few years away.
While the history of the CGI is also filled with men in the past who practiced headline theology, they currently are not setting dates like today's splinter group leaders are. CGI is not immune to do this and will skirt this issue in the days and years to come by claiming that certain events "seem" to fit certain prophecies.
Reed then goes on to say what happens to church members who are fed this twisted way of thinking on a weekly basis:
One of the dangers of this mindset is paranoia. We are told in Philippians 4:6-7 to “not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.” Looking at every new war, earthquake, natural disaster, social trend, or political change as a fulfillment of prophecy can cause anxiety.
Not only are the members being whipped into a constant state of frenzy with daily doses of doom and gloom, but the biggest adherents of headline theology are some of the most paranoid and narcissistic men the church has ever seen. Not confident to rest in the assurances of the One they claim to follow, they lash out and condemn anyone who disagrees with them by labeling it persecution. Persecution has rarely if ever, come upon the Armstrongite Churches of God from the outside. Only when some catastrophic event happens are COG groups brought into the limelight and the public hears about them does the world even know who they are.
If someone were to conduct a survey of how many in the world even know about the COG the chances are billions to 1 that no one has. At least with Herbert Armstrong, he traveled the world and had his face plastered all over the news of those countries, unlike today when COG leaders sit in the "headquarters" or storefronts and bellow, bluster, and babble incoherent nonsense as if God was speaking to them. The same goes for CGI. Ask any person on the street who CGI is and what they preach and no one will have any idea. However, those in Jamaica might, as many of their leaders are active in politics and other public service areas and actively work in their communities for good. Those other COG leaders living lives of luxury in the United States and pampered with every imaginable good fortune at their fingertips do absolutely NOTHING for those in their own communities and the world around them. All any of them do is condemn.
Today's COG leaders think that the constant bombardment of doom and gloom headline theology is essential for their votaries' spiritual understanding. All of them are so arrogant and narcissistic in their views of themselves and what they preach that they can't comprehend why anyone would ignore them or ultimately abandoned their churches. Reed writes:
Another danger with “headline theology” is that it may cause some to lose their faith. Many over the years have put their hopes in a prophetic fulfillment that never comes to pass. Church leaders have unwisely predicted specific dates for the return of Christ or have implied that it would occur within a certain number of years. This date-setting has caused disillusionment in many former Christians. Faith in Christ becomes entwined with faith in their leader's predictions. Once these predictions ultimately fail, they can have a devastating effect on those who gullibly believed them.
Reed goes on to mention the ultimate example of headline theology by mentioning the great, great, great, grandfather of the COG movement, William Miller:
William Miller predicted that Jesus would return to earth by 1844. He was so wrong in his calculations that the ensuing failure has been labeled the “Great Disappointment.” This failed prediction caused many to abandon their faith entirely and others to refer to this event as a reason to not even consider Christianity. Since then, many others have made similar predictions based on faulty calculations and their perceptions of world wars, disasters, and other dramatic events. They have all been wrong, and some of the fallout has been many people losing faith entirely. This also hurts the credibility of organizations and preachers, making their ensuing evangelistic efforts less effective.
The Church of God movement has been forever damaged by the failed prophecies of Herbert W Armstrong, Garner Ted Armstrong, Herman Hoeh, Gerald Waterhouse, and others, in addition to today's current crop of self-appointed theologically bankrupt church leaders.
In one of Reed's closing paragraphs he states:
The final danger of “headline theology” is that it can shift our focus away from what is fundamental to Christianity. Calculating dates, proof-texting, deciphering prophetic puzzles with world events, and other related activities take away our time from what is important. The Apostle Paul made this clear to the Ephesians. “For the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ” (Ephesians 4:12-15).
Headline theology takes away church members' focus upon the One they should be following and places the emphasis on that human leader, without whom no one would have any understanding, or in Bob Thiel's case, know when it was time to flee to Petra.
Christians down through the centuries who have had a direct relationship with Jesus in their lives did not have any need to worry about the crap that COG leaders pump out on a daily basis. Their confidence and faith were in the One who assures them, is by their side no matter what. This is what those Christians in Iraq and now in Afghanistan understand as they are being hunted down and slaughtered. Christians outside the COG have understood this for millennia. Sadly not so much for COG members.
Ask any COG member about the law, clean and unclean meats, and dress codes and they can rattle it off for you immediately. Ask any of them about Jesus or grace and they are at a loss for words. Ask them about justification and sanctification and they will stare at you blindly or accuse you of being a "graceite", "so-called Christian", or a "Christian in name only". They cannot explain any of these theological concepts because they have never been taught to them in the church by today's COG leaders. These men can not teach it because they themselves do not understand it.
Thanks to the headline theology prophets in the COG today, today's Church of God movement is an utter disaster that is leading to its rapid decline. Their focus is on ultimately unimportant things instead of on the One who they should be following. Just take a quick cruise through Bob Thiel's websites and you will see this in action. Nothing he says is ultimately important or relevant to any Christian who is standing assured in Christ. Not one thing! The same goes for Dave Pack and Gerald Flurry as they wait for the imminent return of their creature called "christ" while spending millions in tithe money on infrastructure at their headquarters.
None of these men care about what Jesus teaches or the rest that comes from him. All they are concerned about is taking tithe money from their followers to build world-class buildings and campuses that immediately erect walls around them to keep the public out. Christ never left anyone outside, not so in the Churches of God.
Today's Church of God member is tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of these men, with all their cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting. Not one of these men leading COG today can bring the rest and peace that comes from the assurance of following Christ, a simple understanding Christians outside the COG have understood for centuries.
29 comments:
Great post. Reed got it right
WOW! Dead on... I hope he has a day job cuz I have a feeling CGI may be in the market for a new writer withReed's article being so on target that no one in Armstrongism is supposed to think smart things like what is in this article and it's out where the whole world can see it.
I grew up in WCG and as a kid & adult I thought and acted how he describes. I'm working on the fear thing but growing up ACOG I doubt I'll ever be free of fear it was so ingrained in my young heart, mind and soul.
Good job Jeff Reed I hope you can keep opening eyes even tho others will try and close yours
Excellent post! I never thought I would admit a COG Minister was right, especially in a splinter group of GTA's, and would ever have said such a thing. Maybe there is hope for some of these groups, though I imagine he will be silenced again.
Without Headline Theology and Prediction Addiction, the Churches of God have no message that will keep them viable. The fact that no Jesus is going to come and save them is just now dawning on the faithful who planned on not having to die like everyone else. Well except Dave Pack who will be walking his mini AC by next Sabbath for sure because the math is still correct...
Most long lived denominations figured that out a few hundred years ago and don't major in the minors either. Thus they survive though Evangelical Literalists are suffering from their inability to tolerate those who don't see the world or the scriptures through their eyes. Their celebrity types have not helped much either. Not many celebrity pastors do.
Reed's perspective is the right one and this posting is one of the classics "Aha that's it" moments here on Banned.
I find it unnerving that Banned has a series of articles on headline theology the same time that many commentators are calling the debacle in Afghanistan the worst U.S. military setback since WW2.
Without Headline Theology and Prediction Addiction
"If the first line in a story doesn't get their attention, they won't be reading the second line." (author unknown)
But they still have doctrinal wedgies! (I thank the late Ronald Dart for that zinger.)
And our favourite COG-prophet could possibly put up an article "'Headline Theology' Could there be prophetic ramifications?"
I fully agree with Reed's analysis. But I dislike the term he coined to describe this phenomenon: Headline Theology. "Headline" is fine; "theology" is a stretch.
Armstrongism does not have much of a theology. It has a collection of little booklets and articles written by various men, principally HWA, throughout its history. Some of these men were only transiently in good standing. These fragments have some consistency owing to the fact that they were likely reviewed somehow prior to publication. But there is no document, under official change control, that integrates the comprehensive denominational beliefs of the old WCG. The closest the WCG ever came to that was the publication of HWA's consumer-level overview opus "The Mystery of the Ages."
For instance, when you open up a Christian Systematic Theology, the lead article will be the Doctrine of God. Nowhere in Splinterdom is there a document that describes their Doctrine of God that I know of. If their fragmentary characterizations were condensed and integrated, one would readily recognize that they believe that God is essentially a very powerful human. The early Herman Hoeh claimed that the litigation of the Old Testament was the eternal moral law of God. But if you read that litigation you readily understand that it was intended for human beings. To be in line with the early Hoeh, one must believe that God in his eternal essence is a mighty but not transcendent human-like being. Hoeh's God wrote laws about human activities because those were his own activities apparently. One might deduce, like the Mormons believe, that God has a wife because his eternal moral law proscribes adultery. And this is at total odds with Christianity. The only attempt to correct this, the Systematic Theology Project (STP), HWA marched into the woods and shot without our ever knowing much what it was going to be about. The fragmentation of Armstrongism's written theology conceals many issues they Armstrongists have never faced as a denomination. Their heads have always been in the obscuring clouds of idiosyncratic prophecy.
For this reason, I have tended to call Armstrongism a "religious philosophy" rather than a theology. It just does not rise to the level. So as not to be needlessly fastidious, we must chalk up the term theology contained in Reed's "headline theology" to informal or popular usage. But words change minds and form concepts. So there is the risk of delusion - the delusion that tucked away somewhere Splinterdom has a formal theology.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
7.51 AM
But the church did teach its members to daily read their bibles. So to an outsider, the Armstrong theology was the bible.
NeoTherm said...
I fully agree with Reed's analysis. But I dislike the term he coined to describe this phenomenon: Headline Theology. "Headline" is fine; "theology" is a stretch....For this reason, I have tended to call Armstrongism a "religious philosophy" rather than a theology. It just does not rise to the level. So as not to be needlessly fastidious, we must chalk up the term theology contained in Reed's "headline theology" to informal or popular usage. But words change minds and form concepts. So there is the risk of delusion - the delusion that tucked away somewhere Splinterdom has a formal theology.
===================================
Why am I not surprised you don't like the wording of something! lol I don't think the point Mr Reed was making so well would do well as "Headline Philosophy" You are needlessly fastidious here and anything but "Headline Theology", as a way to describe WCG and "Splinterdom" (great term btw), being well understood by any member, former member or minister past or present is the only term that would make the point.
Headline Theology is the origin of Prediction Addiction which is also the best way to describe many a minister and member as if they knew. Gotta be catchy and true to the experience to be a memorable term. Headline Theology is a keeper.
"Booklet Theology" would work just fine for me as well in defining the kind of education member and minister received as opposed to a real theological education. It's no accident WCG theology is explained at a 5th Grade level. It's as high a level as they could come up with themselves to explain it.
Neo Therm:
I like your analysis.
I would like to mention a subtle idea from my early days at the college. Because of what I was learning, and being the typical enthusiastic newbie I ended up losing my closest friends, my first cousins, and their mom, my dad’s sister. On summer vacation I visited them as my Dad was stationed in France. After church services for them they invited their young minister and his wife to dinner. A bible topic came up, born again. Well, at the end the young minister was flabbergasted, and upset.
his only retort was, “you aren’t using the kjv!” So, I showed him the title page of my kjv bible. That was it, he seemed very embarrassed, and my aunt became very upset. I should have been gentler.
Anyway, this illustrates the subtle point. The theology manual you talk about is very different from the one the wcg used. Their manual was the Bible itself. They wanted book, chapter and verse on what it taught, not what men said it said. That became a problem for the wcg because the bible is the final authority, and using it brought all kinds of criticisms. Times may have changed, but then, and still now, most christians don’t know their bibles. But, if they think they caught you in a “gotcha” momeny then they will jump in like crazy get a concordance, etc. and throw the bible right back.
So, one of the big reasons for no theology tome was, they already had one, the only authoritative one, the bible.
The modern wcg’s since HWA, seemingly have lost their manual, and now preach the pablum that is criticized here.
Anonymous (10:17) wrote "So to an outsider, the Armstrong theology was the bible"
AND
Bob Petry wrote "So, one of the big reasons for no theology tome was, they already had one, the only authoritative one, the bible"
The local Church of Christ congregation uses the Bible in the manner that you might be suggesting. If there is an issue of doctrine, the elders sit down together, read the Bible and come up with the answer. They do not contact HQ. It's DIY theology but not completely so. There minister was trained at one of the CoC colleges and there are published Restoration Movement theologies.
This view comes dangerously close to the view of Gerald Waterhouse. He used to say from the pulpit words like "It's right there in the Bible. Just read it. Nobody needs to interpret it." And sometimes he said this about obscure scriptures that had a special interpretation within Armstrongism.
Armstrongism is a very distinct religous belief that differs markedly from historic Christianity. So it does not fly for them to say "our systematic theology is the Bible." The burden is on them to explain how they arrived at a place that is a one-off from Christianity even though they use the same KJV. They also needed to standardize what their people believe. I heard ministers state that Native Americans should have been exterminated by the "Israelish" settlers in early America. Yet others who read this blog find that incredible, become incensed and claim they have never heard such. Others claim they also heard this. My guess is that this view depended on the local minister.
The Bible is not a theology. The theology is what people agree on who read the Bible. And nobody can read it without interpreting it in some way, including Gerald.
******* Click on my icon for Disclaimer
I attended "AA" and am doing better!
I no longer am an APOCAHOLIC.... Addicted to the apocalypse!
You would think as COG members get up into their 70's and 80's in age, that they would lean more to focus on the internal/personal battles to fight the good fight of faith than the headlines. But I digress.
Wonderful! Possibly the best piece of COG self-critique I've read since Ralph Orr's history of BI...
Peshitta-Pegassus!!! Headline Theology is in reality just another form of proof-texting. Only in this case, it involves the lifting of specific news items which support Armstrong theology (the prophetic portion).
Comment was made that when specific prophetic times and dates fail, (like 1975 and its now annual revisions!) it causes people to lose their faith. Actually, this is not completely accurate. For many of us it has simply caused us to reimagine our teachers in terms of Deut. 18:22! In other words, it frees people from the false teachings of Armstrongism.
Neo Therm,
You make many statements that I find confusing. Why? Well, it seems you take some point you have heard about the Worldwide, or HWA and then add your own assumption to explain why it is wrong. And, also build an assumption on why some things were done with intent to mislead. Others here do the same. Having often been myself in the event, or location or situation you mention, I find your description does not describe correctly what I actually experienced.
Here is one example from your post above: Armstrongism is a very distinct religous belief that differs markedly from historic Christianity. So it does not fly for them to say "our systematic theology is the Bible." The burden is on them to explain how they arrived at a place that is a one-off from Christianity even though they use the same KJV
There have been many places where this was explained. And, most of the resources for the religious beliefs that differ are written by those who practice the christian religion you seem to support.
For example, the RCG/WCG taught the first century ekklesia was taken over from the inside and resulted in the teachings you call christianity today. And they taught it was a totally different ekklesia from that of the apostles. Did Herbert Armstrong make that up? Hardly.
That understanding came from Fuller Theological Seminary (notice the word theological) through Dr. Charles Dorothy, to our new testament Greek class, into papers written up for HWA and the ministry, based on Dr. Wuest’s new testament commentaries. He was a Greek scholar whose works were used by Fuller. The info further came from the I, II, III epistles of John commentary . Very revealing. If you haven’t read them you should. And, you’ll be reading from a standard christian, not HWA.
Will you now belittle Dr. Wuest and his excellent work? Remember as you read, Diotrephes was a forerunner of today’s christianity. He cast out of the ekklesia the early members, including the apostle John. So, what was left after that uproar?
Another christian writer wrote that the ekklesia was a totally different entity after the first 120 years. Of course, wcg opponents jumped on that fast and tried to say what their christian wrote wasn’t true and was inaccurate. Typical reaction, belittle but offer no substantial proof.
Now, this is just one of many many distortions used to discredit HWA, etal, make critical statements based on assumptions and then declare I am right and HWA didn’t have any basis for his assertions. So, if you can’t beat them, confuse them while belittling them.
6.27 PM
You are ignoring the harm caused by 1975. One farmer sold his farm prior to 1975, only to have farmland prices bolt up shortly afterwards. Many members made damaging decisions based on their belief in 1975. Which is why many left. Whitewashing evil is not a Christian trait.
12:11
Please explain why telling the truth is “Whitewashing evil.”
Distorting and exaggerating second and third and fourth and fifth hand stories is deception, misleading and evil in itself. So, why are you doing that.
Plus, what an anonymous farmer did or didn’t do is a different issue. What about the bigger issues of a mainline group over hundreds of child molestations? Where is your upsetment there?
And, all the bigger problems caused by mainstream groups. They exist by the millions, the Wcg at its highest may have been 140,000, in a world of 8 billion people. Why no upset with the 250,000 to 400,000+ annual doctor caused deaths? (Johns Hopkins report.}
That’s equivalent to killing 2 1/2 to 4 1/2 wcg size groups every year. Doesn’t that bother you?
According to a popular book teaching rhetoric you are living in the past using the blame game argument. The book lists three parts to the subject. Blame, Values and Choice. In other words past,, present, future.
Living in the past all the time brings more problems than the past actually had.
I suggest all who can read the book, Thank You for Arguing.
It’s in the future tense, Choice, where problems are solved, spirits are lifted, and change is made.
Bob Petry wrote, "For example, the RCG/WCG taught the first century ekklesia was taken over from the inside and resulted in the teachings you call christianity today . . .That understanding came from Fuller Theological Seminary (notice the word theological) through Dr. Charles Dorothy, to our new testament Greek class, into papers written up for HWA and the ministry, based on Dr. Wuest’s new testament commentaries."
You are effectively supporting my point. I have never heard of this assertion before. You bring it to us from a class that you attended at Ambassador College. Those who look at Armstrongism evaluatively would like to have had the opportunity to assess this argument. If Armstrongism had had a systematic theology, published in the light of day, this would probably have been discussed in its pages if it were important enough to be promulgated by Charles Dorothy. Instead we have some dubious assertions that someone just happened to remember from a class - assertions that nobody has had a chance to evaluate.
So all I have are some circumstantial concerns with this revelation at this time. I do not have Dorothy's material to research nor does anyone else I would expect. First, Wuest was an evangelical. If he discovered the smoking gun that Christianity is all wrong and, hence, Armstrongism is all right, why would he have continued in evangelicalism? Second, isn't it ia little convenient that a card-carrying Armstrongist would delve into Fuller publications and come back with incontrovertible evidence that Christianity was effectively subverted in the First Century? I am sure Fuller theologians would like to have reviewed Dorothy's understanding.
Elswewhere in this blog, I identified the conceptual source of Armstrongism in the First Century. It was not the Late Second Temple Messianic Judaism that later became Christianity - what we would associate with the Jeruasalem Church. It was not the form of Christianity practiced in the Gentile church - what we would associate with the Jerusalem Conference. It was rather an anti-Pauline group known as The Circumcision Party. Armstrongism is compatible in principle with the teaching of The Circumcision Party although I do not believe there is a direct and unbroken historical connection between these two sects. After 18 and a half centuries, HWA re-discovered The Circumcision Party's philosophy and attempted to promulgate it as Christianity. That attempt has now collapsed into a collection of little squabbling apocalyptic Millerite denominations.
That is my off-hand understanding. If there had been a published systematic theology to come out of Armstrongism, no doubt this issue would have been laid to rest long ago with some rigor. And perhaps Armstrongism could have undergone the revision it needed to come into the Christian pale.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Neo Therm
I understand your situation not having available some of this material. However, some of it is available in various papers written for graduate thesis by AC students. You can find them on sites archiving AC and WCG publications.
Within those papers are many quotes from christian and non christian resources. You can easily search for and find them on the internet. I forget the site name, but one specializes in student thesis subjects.
In the meantime I’ll see if I can find a couple for you. Once you get their locations you will be able to find other works that might interest you.
I prefer the Apostle Paul’s theological dissertation when he was being falsely accused too. It’s simple, accurate, complete and to the point. Enjoy: Acts 24:14-16.
Neo Therm said: That is my off-hand understanding. If there had been a published systematic theology to come out of Armstrongism, no doubt this issue would have been laid to rest long ago with some rigor. And perhaps Armstrongism could have undergone the revision it needed to come into the Christian pale.
——————————————————
a.If there had been a published systematic theology to come out of Armstrongism, no doubt this issue would have been laid to rest long ago with some rigor.
Response: The real problem is, no matter what wcg produced the christian world would attack it, as one can see. AND the atheists attack the wcg as strongly as christians do. In fact, most of the internal destruction came from christian and and atheist infiltrators intent on bringing the wcg down. But, nobody wants to hear that part, so they belittle it. Yet, both have written about their “success.”
b. And perhaps Armstrongism could have undergone the revision it needed to come into the Christian pale.
————————————————-
First, since christianity, provable so, does not follow or obey the Bible, a book they claim is their own, why in the world would bible believers, followers, and real users of the book want to jump into that kind of “pale?”
Also, the constant over use of the word Armstrongism, shows an attitude. It is a derogatory term to show disgust, and to blatantly belittle those labeled by it. Anyone who has the gumption should google why people label others with -ism. They just think they are so much better than those -ism-ists.
I am not an Armstrongite, never have been, I am “a follower of the Way.”
I don’t keep the Sabbath because HWA told me to. The Bible did.
I don’t study the bible in depth because HWA told me to. The bible did.
I don’t follow good health laws because HWA told me to. The bible taught me to.
The bible has lots of names for the critics of the book, and those who believe it. Maybe we should start using those names on Banned and see how folks like being labeled what they are.
The future is bright, so as Paul and others implied, think on those things. Just think of it.
"Watch!"
As I may have blurted out before, Watch what? A good point in Jeff's post is how the word was intended to be used. The COG take was epitomized in an old ICG illustration of a man staring through binoculars at what was probably meant to be Europe: watch the Germans, watch for the beast... The emphasis has not been we must watch ourselves.
Since this post deals with prophecy, I wondered what responses would be like on a statement like this.
——————-
WHEN did the last generation, THIS generation, begin? And, when will it end?
Before beginning the explanation of the chronology of THIS generation, the final one before the return of the Messiah, let me explain this for you.
THIS generation began in September of 1998. And, assuming the benchmark info found in Scripture is the accurate understanding, then, it will end in 2031/32. Prior to that in 2025/6 will begin the so-called "last seven years."
4.32 AM
Try re-reading your 6.27 PM post. It sounds like you think the 1975 debacle a good thing. The "some good things resulted from this disaster" argument, while technically true. paints the wrong picture and trivializes the harm suffered by many. Especially since you fail to acknowledge the harm done to many innocent members.
You sound like a white washing minister.
Bob Petry: You wrote,"First, since christianity, provable so, does not follow or obey the Bible"
You desperately need to continue to read this material published on this blog. I would even suggest that you look at the archives and read that material. I would be horribly dishonest if I referred to Armstrongism as Christianity. It just is not. There may be some forlorn Christians in their ranks but my guess is that God will eventually rescue them. At this point, anything that I can say in brief is not likely to do you any good.
Let me leave you with this thought. The followers of The Way do not believe that a whole agenda of Old Testment Laws have been made a requirement for salvation. Most of these Mosaic laws that are supposedly written on your heart, you do not even keep. So if you believe you have found salvation in Armstrongism, you need to reconsider. HWA did not give you a viable path to salvation. He gave you a path to assured condemnation.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
12.57 PM
"..most of the internal destruction came from Christians and atheistic infiltrators intent on bringing the WCG down."
If that was true, this blog and similar wouldn't exist. You are like some fanatical political party supporter whose party can do no wrong.
The church destruction is the result of HWA choosing to run the church along abusive cult lines. Members in the splinters are still beaten down and treated like irresponsible children. Since you have deified HWA and his church, I'm most likely wasting my time responding to you.
Petry is like many of those that pop on here and think they can educate us on how things are supposed to be or that we were too stupid to understand what HWA taught. No one cares about his beliefs and end times junk theology.
Excellent!
No, I never have thought I could educate this group. That’s impossible for the bias is too deep.
I have read the archives, & books written to make the authors look like crusading angels. Not.
This blog exists because some are making sure their attack keeps any semblance of the Worldwide down.
Armstrong did not choose to use abusive cult lines. The uninformed critics here label it that. For they have no idea what really happened, so they concoct “its a cult” piece of deception.
The idea that the law was a requirement for salvation is totally off base, and a sign that one has never really tried to understand what the RCG actually taught.
This should clarify my position.
Herbert W. Armstrong was correct in the beginning on many bible teachings. Later, after some major growth others that came in later brought their former beliefs with them, and began pushing them. Because we are dealing with religion here a lot of people with personal problems showed up, but never worked on themselves, and the problems remained. So, who got blamed? Three guesses and the first two don’t count. Today many of these people would be called “karens” “snow flakes” etc. They blamed all their problems on wcg, etc, and as today, never took on personal responsibility. These are the people, in too many cases this blog fusses about.
Later, more growth, money got big, and attracted the flies pretending to be butterflies. Herbert Armstrong, aging, got excited and started promoting them. Why just think, these people all of a sudden were being called from institutions like Harvard, Yale, and other big colleges. A millionaire insurance businessman showed up, etc. Once these folks got into positions where they were permitted to spend the money themselves, well they did, as Vern Mattson showed me one day in his office.
Later on, Herbert Armstrong, from age, began to show signs of what we call dementia and other things. He would start off new sermons and about half way forget the topic and flow into his standard sermon on how the church was founded. By this time he wasn’t running the show, others were, but everyone outside the top level thought only he was running everything. One day outside his office in the “repent” house, he told me how everyone was using him as the interior decorator for the college. Then he read the list of what they wanted him to do. Approve curtains, rugs, furniture, colors, etc.
In mid 1960s, there was a noticeable difference among the ministers, and others. Something had changed, drastically on looking back, but then it wasn’t clear. For example: prior to that time it was bad to say things like darn, gosh. Then came dirty joke telling, one of the worst I ever heard, was told by my boss, a local elder along with his deacon assistant.
In addition to that, topless clubs were permitted in the LA area. So, who began going there? Many in the ministry. Why did they do these things? Well, here is what one popular evangelist told me was the reasoning. We are called to preach about sin to the members. If you don’t know what it is and looks like, you can’t really preach against it. That kind of nonsense was brought in by the outsiders I’ve talked about.
These are the same disgusting people who began writing books supposedly exposing the underbelly of the college and church.
As to the incest nonsense. I worked with Vern Mattson who complained bitterly about Hunting and others spending “God’s money” on church credit cards like there was no end of it. He was really upset about it that day. Considering what the goofballs claim, why should he be upset about God’s money, unless he believed that.
I lived and experienced the time, places and people complained about on this and other sites. And I know BS when I see it.
Those are just some of the things that caused us to leave the wcg. We knew what really happened, and it wasn’t the fantasies promulgated here.
1975 is just an over inflated false flag. If that was such a problem, not, the whole church would have collapsed then not decades later.
If that was such a problem, not, the whole church would have collapsed then not decades later.
Like Bill Clinton, HWA had his way of diverting attention from his problem to an external problem.
Post a Comment