Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before!
With all the new crazy self-appointed Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars leading various Churches of God today, it is important to hold these agents of deception accountable.
Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web of Corrupt Leaders
The absolute control mechanism of a cult, is when they use the DISFELLOWSHIPPED & MARKED policy.
The whole idea behind it is to control "information flow" to the believers of the cult. It is also a fear mechanism of "killing the dissident" for all eternity, and is in effect (for the believer) the ultimate form of thuggery, even worse than a physical death.
The fear of losing loved family members for the rest of this physical life, keeps people in line as well. It creates a huge hesitation on leaving, and creates (at least outwardly) compliant members as well.
Almost always, these type of cults are dominated by a Sociopath who claim a direct special exclusive connection to God, usually with an accompanying religious title, like a Biblical character, i.e. Moses, Elijah, Zerubabel , Jesus, Amos , Prophet or just simply Apostle, and many more.
I have never known any group that has these characteristics to be normal or healthy in any way. (and these include non Christian types of groups too). Never , ever, get started with such a group .
It is fine to be a Christian, even a Sabbatarian Christian, but do not ever become entwined with the persona of a cult leader. If you are lonely and need social outlet, find healthy service groups, and volunteer groups that serve the community.
Living in the past Tonto. "Marked" is used these days by middle managers gossiping about others behind their backs. It has no use in the split and splintered modern ACOG. Disfellowshipment in the more Liberal ACOG is more balanced in these modern days. A disfellowshipment can be appealed against and at the least investigated.
Great talk and very thoughtful comment by Tonto. I loved the line about her realization that she and her group weren't the embodiment of Divine truth. Allowing for the fact that we are all human and capable of error is the first step in becoming a more mature and open-minded individual. Even so, her talk points out the difficulty inherent in achieving friendship and understanding when one side refuses to even entertain any opinions/views which contradict their own.
"Living in the past Tonto. "Marked" is used these days by middle managers gossiping about others behind their backs. It has no use in the split and splintered modern ACOG. Disfellowshipment in the more Liberal ACOG is more balanced in these modern days. A disfellowshipment can be appealed against and at the least investigated."
This is a load of bull! Disfellowshipments are not balanced and still are abusive towards the people they don't like and members still treat them like dirt. Being "marked" is still an abusive tool in every single splinter group out there, including the "enlightened more balanced" UCG hierarchy. There is no COG out here that is "more balanced". They still hold on to the abusive treatments they were taught in the past in the WCG and none of them have the balls to actually step out in faith and be totally transparent and kind to their followers.
A mistake many members have made is slowly letting go of friendships outside the church. Once all their friends are church members, they are vulnerable to threats of being disfellowshipped/suspended if they question or disagree with some church teaching. It's a ridiculous situation whereby at the whim of a minister, people can have all their friends ripped away from them.
Not only that, 5:49! How is a Christian supposed to let his/her light shine? You simply cannot do this by only being around "the choir". Letting your light shine is a way to make people ask you questions about the way you conduct your life. An outstanding example illustrates differences, and makes others want to imitate that example.
Even Gerald Weston in the recent LCN admitted that "marking" in Romans 16 was an instruction to the members to 'take note of' the individual. Effectively undermining the whole doctrine of marking someone being an ecclesiastical disciplinary measure designed to isolate and punish.
I don't know if anyone in COGdom ever carefully considered or learned the "Leona McNair" lesson about marking. I do know that in instances where the ministry thought that they were in the right from a biblical standpoint as they were clearly defying time honored ethics, human decency, or even man-made laws regarding slander and libel, they refused to bridle their tongues, and instead spewed out horrible, offensive descriptives of ex members' alleged sins. There was no clergy-parishioner confidentiality. I believe they actually viewed such confidentiality as being a Catholic thing rather than a Godly principle.
Rod Meredith may have been the one taken to task for this because of his remarks about Mrs. McNair, but during the same era, HWA maligned one Buck Taylor, who also sued. Mr. Taylor died before his case could be resolved in court, and many church members believed that his death was God's answer to their prayers on behalf of HWA.
There have been too many examples cited right here about similar instances in PCG, LCG, and RCG for anyone to find credence with the idea that this problem was ever corrected. In fact, sinful behavior of HWA has never been treated as such and repented of or corrected in COGdom. HWA's sins of clergy misconduct or abuse have generally been seen as license, and time-honored policy or tradition. That's what happens when you follow a man, and it's why we use "Armstrongism" as a pejorative!
8.40 AM The fear me of losing loved family members if marked, is why many ACOGs teach that it's a sin to marry outside the church. This teaching is non biblical, and is an example of adding to God's words. The scripture given to support this teaching is "be equally yoked." This is just referring to being friends with people of similar maturity, education etc. But according to these churches, if you marry a church psychopath, you are equally yoked. But if you marry a reasonable person outside the church, you are unequally yoked. The church position is nonsense. Btw, a person should marry the person indicated by the holy spirit, who might be a atheist. A Christian is one who follows Christ rather than a physical church.
I cannot even begin to imagine why a nonmember of Armstrongism would want to be married to a member. What would be in it for them? We've heard the stories of such codependents here, and it's not a pretty picture. Only exception would be if the member were a COGlodino (in name only) just to fool their family so they wouldn't lose them if they left.
Even Gerald Weston in the recent LCN admitted that "marking" in Romans 16 was an instruction to the members to 'take note of' the individual. Effectively undermining the whole doctrine of marking someone being an ecclesiastical disciplinary measure designed to isolate and punish.
Weston didn't quite go as far as he should have, but it is great progress for him to note that it is the brethren's responsibility to "mark", not the ministry's. He didn't quite go so far as to say that "mark" can also be translated "note". Paul's instruction is clear -- the brethren are to note those who cause division and avoid them, and nowhere is the ministry involved at all. For Weston to even get close to that is remarkable, and a departure from LCG practices of the past.
14 comments:
The absolute control mechanism of a cult, is when they use the DISFELLOWSHIPPED & MARKED policy.
The whole idea behind it is to control "information flow" to the believers of the cult. It is also a fear mechanism of "killing the dissident" for all eternity, and is in effect (for the believer) the ultimate form of thuggery, even worse than a physical death.
The fear of losing loved family members for the rest of this physical life, keeps people in line as well. It creates a huge hesitation on leaving, and creates (at least outwardly) compliant members as well.
Almost always, these type of cults are dominated by a Sociopath who claim a direct special exclusive connection to God, usually with an accompanying religious title, like a Biblical character, i.e. Moses, Elijah, Zerubabel , Jesus, Amos , Prophet or just simply Apostle, and many more.
I have never known any group that has these characteristics to be normal or healthy in any way. (and these include non Christian types of groups too). Never , ever, get started with such a group .
It is fine to be a Christian, even a Sabbatarian Christian, but do not ever become entwined with the persona of a cult leader. If you are lonely and need social outlet, find healthy service groups, and volunteer groups that serve the community.
Living in the past Tonto. "Marked" is used these days by middle managers gossiping about others behind their backs. It has no use in the split and splintered modern ACOG.
Disfellowshipment in the more Liberal ACOG is more balanced in these modern days. A disfellowshipment can be appealed against and at the least investigated.
I agree, Tonto. This type of authoritarian leadership is idolatry. It breaks the first commandment, and is therefore unchristian.
I wish this were common knowledge 😞
Great talk and very thoughtful comment by Tonto. I loved the line about her realization that she and her group weren't the embodiment of Divine truth. Allowing for the fact that we are all human and capable of error is the first step in becoming a more mature and open-minded individual. Even so, her talk points out the difficulty inherent in achieving friendship and understanding when one side refuses to even entertain any opinions/views which contradict their own.
"Living in the past Tonto. "Marked" is used these days by middle managers gossiping about others behind their backs. It has no use in the split and splintered modern ACOG.
Disfellowshipment in the more Liberal ACOG is more balanced in these modern days. A disfellowshipment can be appealed against and at the least investigated."
This is a load of bull! Disfellowshipments are not balanced and still are abusive towards the people they don't like and members still treat them like dirt. Being "marked" is still an abusive tool in every single splinter group out there, including the "enlightened more balanced" UCG hierarchy. There is no COG out here that is "more balanced". They still hold on to the abusive treatments they were taught in the past in the WCG and none of them have the balls to actually step out in faith and be totally transparent and kind to their followers.
A mistake many members have made is slowly letting go of friendships outside the church. Once all their friends are church members, they are vulnerable to threats of being disfellowshipped/suspended if they question or disagree with some church teaching.
It's a ridiculous situation whereby at the whim of a minister, people can have all their friends ripped away from them.
Not only that, 5:49! How is a Christian supposed to let his/her light shine? You simply cannot do this by only being around "the choir". Letting your light shine is a way to make people ask you questions about the way you conduct your life. An outstanding example illustrates differences, and makes others want to imitate that example.
Yup
Even Gerald Weston in the recent LCN admitted that "marking" in Romans 16 was an instruction to the members to 'take note of' the individual. Effectively undermining the whole doctrine of marking someone being an ecclesiastical disciplinary measure designed to isolate and punish.
I don't know if anyone in COGdom ever carefully considered or learned the "Leona McNair" lesson about marking. I do know that in instances where the ministry thought that they were in the right from a biblical standpoint as they were clearly defying time honored ethics, human decency, or even man-made laws regarding slander and libel, they refused to bridle their tongues, and instead spewed out horrible, offensive descriptives of ex members' alleged sins. There was no clergy-parishioner confidentiality. I believe they actually viewed such confidentiality as being a Catholic thing rather than a Godly principle.
Rod Meredith may have been the one taken to task for this because of his remarks about Mrs. McNair, but during the same era, HWA maligned one Buck Taylor, who also sued. Mr. Taylor died before his case could be resolved in court, and many church members believed that his death was God's answer to their prayers on behalf of HWA.
There have been too many examples cited right here about similar instances in PCG, LCG, and RCG for anyone to find credence with the idea that this problem was ever corrected. In fact, sinful behavior of HWA has never been treated as such and repented of or corrected in COGdom. HWA's sins of clergy misconduct or abuse have generally been seen as license, and time-honored policy or tradition. That's what happens when you follow a man, and it's why we use "Armstrongism" as a pejorative!
8.40 AM
The fear me of losing loved family members if marked, is why many ACOGs teach that it's a sin to marry outside the church. This teaching is non biblical, and is an example of adding to God's words. The scripture given to support this teaching is "be equally yoked." This is just referring to being friends with people of similar maturity, education etc. But according to these churches, if you marry a church psychopath, you are equally yoked. But if you marry a reasonable person outside the church, you are unequally yoked. The church position is nonsense.
Btw, a person should marry the person indicated by the holy spirit, who might be a atheist. A Christian is one who follows Christ rather than a physical church.
I cannot even begin to imagine why a nonmember of Armstrongism would want to be married to a member. What would be in it for them?
We've heard the stories of such codependents here, and it's not a pretty picture. Only exception would be if the member were a COGlodino (in name only) just to fool their family so they wouldn't lose them if they left.
Even Gerald Weston in the recent LCN admitted that "marking" in Romans 16 was an instruction to the members to 'take note of' the individual. Effectively undermining the whole doctrine of marking someone being an ecclesiastical disciplinary measure designed to isolate and punish.
Weston didn't quite go as far as he should have, but it is great progress for him to note that it is the brethren's responsibility to "mark", not the ministry's. He didn't quite go so far as to say that "mark" can also be translated "note". Paul's instruction is clear -- the brethren are to note those who cause division and avoid them, and nowhere is the ministry involved at all. For Weston to even get close to that is remarkable, and a departure from LCG practices of the past.
Post a Comment