Are the rumors true? Join host Dawn Blue as she interviews a former member/employee of The Restored Church of God, headed up by David Pack who calls himself Christ's apostle. With its origins stemming from Herbert Armstrong’s controversial Worldwide Church of God.
Answering questions posed by the locals & around the globe.
Part 1 of this interview explores topics from The Restored Church of God's religious beliefs, finances, & history. Get an inside view of the “mysterious church across from Giant Eagle” that locals have been talking about for years. Who've referred to it as cult-like & pilfering members assets for extra tithing collections.
24 comments:
Interesting video. He seems like a nice guy.
In the video he reveals that only 90 people attend the compound location in Wadsworth, and that there are only 1500 people in the church around the world. He states that this is down from 3500 people that were part of the church just 5 years earlier, when he started attending.
Thus Pack has had a loss of 60% of his membership in just the last 5 years. This is probably part of the reason of the deeper and deeper madness that Pack has descended into out of desperation and grasping at straws. The more he goes down that rabbit hole, the more people he ends up driving away, in a perpetual whirlpool of oblivion, like a Black Hole star.
jon brisby is the same ,he speaks out of both sides of his mouth.
The FALSE PROPHETS And Their SATANIC IMPOSTER CULTS
Satan's Number One False Prophet
After losing the copyright court case with the Worldwide Church of God, Gerald Flurry simply bought the copyrights to some of the old writings of Herbert W. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God for his own PCG cult from the apostate Joey, Jr. in the WCG. Gerald Flurry then simply edited and changed the old writings to suit all his “new revelation” that he had “flooded” his PCG cult with about how great “That Prophet” Gerald Flurry supposedly was. Using the old writings of HWA and his WCG was great bait to attract people into Gerald's perverse and cruel scam. Then the victims got hit with all of Gerald Flurry's new nonsense, satanic abuse, and prophetic failures. From immediately suppressing the true gospel message of the kingdom of God, to the identity theft of claiming that Gerald (rather than Jesus) was “That Prophet” of Deuteronomy 18:18-19 that everyone was supposed to listen to, to wrecking families, Gerald Flurry did the exact diametrical opposite of everything that HWA had taught.
Satan's Number Two False Prophet
David Pack was too late and too poor to buy the copyrights to HWA's old writings, and the WCG-PCG copyright court case spooked him, so he spent several early years rewriting the old WCG literature in his own words for his own RCG cult. Now, that rewritten literature at Dave's website is great bait for attracting people using some of the old teachings of HWA and his WCG. After they are in the RCG cult, the victims get hit with all of Dave's new self-promotion, new “common” theft doctrine, and endless prophetic date guesses that always fail. At least Dave Pack had to work a bit on his scam in the early years. Dave Pack once mentioned all the work he had done in rewriting the old WCG literature in his own words and assured everyone that Satan would not have him go to that much trouble just so he could go bad in the end.
Great job Marc. It was interesting to hear a lay member from headquarters perspective of the operations of the RCG. That perspective is different than what the lay member in the "field" encounters especially concerning "Common".
I applaud your fearlessness and courage. I think you presented a balanced summation for the wanting to know Wadsworth community.
In the end, this is a Dave Pack and his doctrines problem. Unfortunate for the lowly member and unfortunate for the greater Wadsworth community who get no benefit from a man enriching himself operating tax exempt as a "non profit organization".
Interesting interview from my perspective as my family's origins in the Radio Church of God (later named Worldwide Church of God) date back to the early 1950s. It was interesting to see Armstrongism practiced in this one splinter group today as described by the guest Marc Cebrian. Some things sounded very familiar, others did not. The Communist Common doctrine, for example, was not preached or practiced by WCG under Herbert Armstrong.
I had two criticisms with the presentation. One is where Dawn Blue stated that she did not think Dave Pack was delusional. My jaw dropped when I heard that. That is very debatable. I am not a shrink, but if Pack isn’t delusional, then certainly he is a sociopath (Definition: An enduring pattern of behavior characterized by disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others). Personally, I think he is both!
Second criticism is toward Marc. He spent an inordinate amount of time explaining the Church and its doctrines to the point of appearing to defend RCG, but very little time explaining WHY he considered Dave Pack a fraud. Ok, Pack’s message changes almost on a daily basis, but does that make him a fraud? A person can be sincere, but sincerely wrong – even on a daily basis. Personally, I agree with Marc, but as he is explaining the Church to the outside world, the case for fraud was not fully articulated particularly as he appeared to support the Church’s doctrines.
On a completely unrelated topic, I seem to recall from my Worldwide Church of God days in the early 1970s that the Baltimore, Maryland WCG congregation had a ministerial trainee by the name of Bill Pack. It was my understanding that he was Dave Pack’s brother. Whatever happened to him, and is he in the RCG splinter group with Dave?
Richard
LoFCOG:
Obviously, I've had no direct discussions with Marc, but what went through my mind as I listened to his very measured comments was that perhaps he saw his greater audience as being the people who were still members of RCG, and that the way in which he presented himself was most likely the best possible way to reach them, and to help them see the error in continuing to follow Dave Pack. He might have been doing with feathers what most former members would attempt to do with hammers. Or, the comments could be just his own personality flowing, with no particular motives in either direction. Of course, it is very difficult and unusual to be neutral where Armstrongism is concerned. Opinions in most cases gravitate towards the poles.
One wonders where Marc's odyssey will take him next. Might he still be looking for the most genuine group of Armstrongites? Will he practice the tenets as an unaligned independent? Or will he transition to a completely different religious philosophy altogether? Or return to nonbelief? It is plain that he is in the middle of a personal growth period, and the final outcome appears not to be solidified at this point in time.
To "What About the Truth" - Thanks for the comments. I left because of the teachings, not because of Dave Pack personally. The Wadsworth community has had many questions for many years. I was hoping to address them, but too much for just one hour. The HQ experience is VERY different from the field...agreed.
To "Lake of Fire Church of God / Richard" - Defending RCG is only a result of answering questions that the community had, which were rumors. Wacky ideas. So, in stating what is true...sounds like defending them. I can see that. - DCP being a fraud will be covered specifically in Part 2. We didn't have time for that in the hour we spent. Hang in there because it's coming.
Bill Pack is DCP's brother. They were on good terms for a while...he even taught a class for Ambassador Center in Wadsworth. Not sure what went down between them. Bill was just suddenly gone and never mentioned again.
Bill pack was never in RCG and it has been said they aren't on speaking terms, bill is in the Carolinas and is in the health food stores started by their parents that is also where packs boys are.
He was never a member nor did he attend, their falling out came just prior to Jenifer and Kevin leaving
Loved the part where he says: "What do horses have to do with the preaching of the Gospel" ... I'd love to see Dave's response to that. LoL
I thought he whitewashed common by saying that if you had two houses, they were encouraged to give one to the church. Rather they pressured even widows to give their only house to the church. Likewise Dave told members to sell their one and only house, and give most of the money to his church. If they were married to a non member, Dave reminded them that half the house legally belonged to them. so they should sell the house and give their half to the church. Members were not just encouraged to give most of their money to his church, but pressured to do so. This guy's description is way too kind.
Btw, I didn't appreciate him condemning people for anonymously criticizing the church. He passed on Dave's childish explanations for his oversized property and buildings while not commenting on the horses. So who would threaten him? He obviously doesn't want to offend the church members that he's still friends with. But if a person was more objective, they would have doubts about their safety. Anonymity is a right for a reason.
Anon 5/8/22 7:11, Yes, I also thought he whitewashed the "Common" subject. My parents didn't have any money, never paid common when they were members but when Pack came out and said that "If you don't pay common then you don't have salvation", my dad was really upset. My mom had just passed and he couldn't come to terms with the fact that they didn't have anything to pay common with and then be told there's no salvation for them? My dad saw the light and quit that week.
In my book that is out and out extortion, I sent an email to Wadsworth with the definition of extortion and I heard about it a week later, I was told to never do that again. I hit someone's nerve.
You can't please everyone. :)
Anonymous 7:11am - We had barely gotten into the Common discussion. I understand some folks have had far more severe run-ins with that doctrine. For example, I know of a woman they pressured to get divorced (while at the Feast) to give Common to the church. I can only speak about Common in my experiences, rather than "somebody told me" that I don't know. If anyone has a horror story regarding Common, they should contact Dawn Blue and let her know. I only feel comfortable telling stories I have first-hand experience with or a close personal connection with someone who has a story to tell. I'm walking the line between being "fair" and "too kind" - the greater indictment is coming in Part 2. A friend of mine this weekend let me know there was a lot more pressure on him than I let on in Part 1. I will be sure to note that and the concerns expressed by others.
My personal opinion is that if you cannot put your name next to your words, you shouldn't say it. I'm not saying you are "bad" as it is your right to speak your peace. I never felt in danger...and if you aren't in the church currently and yet speak against them...what do you have to lose by identifying yourself? What are they going to "do to you" if they know who you are? Yes they read this blog, but don't actively do anything about it. What's right for you isn't what's right for me. I've read people snipe online for years, never letting us know who they are. If you don't know who they are, how can they have any credibility? Do what you want to do...sir or madam. That is your right.
Anonymous 1:30pm - That's horrible what happened to your parents. Awful. Let Dawn Blue know your story...she really wants to get more info from folks out there. She is comfortable keeping the information anonymous if you so desire.
Obviously, every terrible thing has not reached my ears or is something I am aware of. There is pressure and guilt and "you better or no salvation" with Common...I plan on making that more clear next time. We covered a lot of ground in a short time and I cannot say everything about everything. As a former member (friend of mine has said) who left HQ, "What they are doing isn't illegal. But it is unethical."
I'm trying to be measured with my statements. Get too angry and you look like someone with an axe to grind. Be too complimentary and you look like a mole. I'm doing the best I can to be open, forthright, honest, factually accurate, and fair. I cannot guarantee being utterly thorough to everyone's satisfaction.
RCG (to be more accurate, Dave Pack) has done some truly awful things to people and has caused a lot of pain. I hope to convey that more sharply in Part 2.
I appreciate the criticism. At least people are watching this.
Thank you for contributing to this blog in a respectful manner. I do not agree with everything I read on it but I do try to keep up because my husband has been in RCG for a long long time and continues to defend everything that is said and done. So I need to know what's going on. And I pray for him daily that God will open his eyes to see what is the truth.
Marc Serbian-- What was it about UCG that made you leave that group?
5.19 PM
Marc. you didn't just mention Daves' Common doctrine. you also gave the scriptural reference used to justify this doctrine. It's as if you are Daves' official spokesman. As a side issue, there is no mention of the apostles actually teaching Common. In Acts 4-5 "Didn't it (the land) belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal?" That is, the apostles respected this members' property rights. There is no admonishment to the so called Common doctrine here. Plus the Common monies was distributed to those in need rather than to Dave Packs farm and horses.
Do you know that there are federal laws against "chilling?" For example, police cannot act in a way to inhibits people from exercising their constitutional rights. These laws are on the books for a reason. Even though I've posted anonymously and kept my beliefs to myself, I've had relatives verbally assault me for my posts. Dave would not personally come after his critics, but people with his same lack of character would. You obviously haven't been persecuted. People who post anonymously can freely speak their minds. Using their real names would chill their comments. Though you give lip service to rights. you, like most ACOGs members, do not understand the topic. Yeap, those darn pesty rights.
Anon Monday, May 9, 2022 at 9:31:00 AM
I think you've missed Marc's point regarding his explanation of the common doctrine. He is just answering to how RCG justifies their position (which as you stated clearly is not remotely Biblical). To go through each question and doctrine explaining why they are true/false is really not possible in an hour. I thought his delivery was excellent and I'm looking forward to the next video.
I completely understand where you're coming from regarding the anonymous posts. But as someone who knows Marc and worked with him for a number a years I can defend his character and let you know that he is as honest of a person that can meet.
I would suggest perhaps waiting till the end of the story before passing criticism and don't draw your own conclusions about Marc's background, personal trials and other things. People face persecution in different ways and just the fact that he is willing to go publically on record to expose Dave Pack should be applauded. I myself did not choose that path, but perhaps it was the wrong decision.....it's hard to know what to do sometimes.
I say all this not to be rude or start an argument with you so I hope it doesn't come accross that way :)
Hope you have a great afternoon.
This says "How its Done #2." Where is How its Done #1.
2.05 PM
Dan. thank you for responding to my post. At Banned, ideas are peer reviewed and debated, as it should be in a civil society. Many of Christ's dialogues were in this category.
It's only in ACOG-land that this is regarded as "rude and start(ing) an argument." Ah, the cult mis-programming.
I've read this blog for over a decade and there are PLENTY of people who get offended by comments - both inside and outside of "ACOG-land".
My statement was simply meant to clarify my intent should it be taken out of context. If that comes accross as a side effect of being in a cult then you might need some cynicism mis-programming LOL
Dan Quimby, I very much appreciate the public support. Thank you!!!
Anonymous May 9 9:31am - "Marc. you didn't just mention Daves' Common doctrine. you also gave the scriptural reference used to justify this doctrine. It's as if you are Daves' official spokesman." --- You gave me a chuckle. You are so funny, bro!
Anonymous May 9 5:37pm - I am just now reading these comments this morning. To be clear: The "How It's Done" show was #2 but it was Part 1 of our interview. (Dawn will probably need to be more specific in the future. Her show wasn't created to interview me...it was already established when I was invited.) She will be covering many more community-related topics in the future. I see the confusion with #2 being Part 1 and #3 being Part 2. I didn't build it or produce it, I just showed up to talk. :)
Tonto, I left UCG after being there for 3 years because my 3rd Tithe year was coming and the local minister said I didn't have to do it. Yet, it was there in my Bible. Also, I felt all the literature was "weak" and that there was no organized passion about preaching the gospel to the world. Also, I thought the Beyond Today show was beyond boring. As a member, I could barely stomach listening to three men sitting around a table agreeing. I went to RCG because Dave Pack spoke with strength and power and passion. Who would have known he was going to go off the rails with his Elijah/That Prophet heresy? (Well, maybe you and Dennis knew...)
Marc said "Dave Pack spoke with strength and power and passion."
This is true. Pack is an effective speaker, beguiling in fact.
"The Clarion Call" is at https://exitsupportnetwork.com/expose-of-clarion-call-the-time-is-now/ .
MP3 is at http://www.mediafire.com/download/7675szdkljzhiav/Dave_Pack_-_Clarion_Call,_The_Time_Is_Now_Nov_2007.mp3 .
I'm surprised RCG hasn't had this taken down long ago.
David C. Pack is now suffering from the most advanced stage of PREDICTION ADDICTION that anyone in any so-called COG ever had.
I submit: there is no 3rd Tithe. It's a deception of Satan and Herbert. What's third was the year, not the tithe, but the phrase "3rd tithe" indicates there must be a second and first tithe, but those phrases "1st, 2nd, 3rd tithe" are not in the Bible. God instructed a tithe every third year for the Levites, stranger, fatherless, widow because they were about 3.3% of the population. The Levites alone were only about 2% of the population - Num 31:30. Therefore about 3.3% of the produce of the land was given on an annualized basis, or 10% every third year, to others. Of course it's debatable whether the stranger, etc was 1.3% of the population but it is an effort to deduce, to understand why tithing was only every third year. If the Levites were 2% of the population why would they get 10% of the produce of the land of an entire nation every year?? That seems like way too much to give.
The bottom line: the Bible says third year, not third tithe. Much more can be said, such as, firstfruits were given every year but firstfruits are firstfruits, not tithes.
Post a Comment