For some reason, certain Church of God leaders seems to imagine themselves finding the Ark of the Covenant and that when they do this will prove their legitimacy and prove the Bible.
First, we had Gerald Flurry, seeking to dig up Hill of Tara in Ireland where he foolishly believes the ark is buried. So sure of this he was, that he bought a property in England to give him better access to the hill. Never once did it cross his alcohol-riddled mind that there was no way that Ireland would allow a national treasure to be dug up by some lunatic American religious snake oil salesman. That was no more going to happen than Scottland giving him the Coronation Stone for his mythical creature to come back and sit upon.
This brings us today to our very own Great Bwana to Africa, the greatest Church of God leader since the 1st-century church leaders walked the earth. A man so important and significant that he was planned before the creation of the world by God and Jesus himself to arrive in these perilous end times to be doubly blessed in order to give a final warning to the world. A man who is so significant that he is the end times embodiment of Joshua, Amos, Zechariah, Elijah, Elisha, Micah, Zerubbabel, Moses, Aaron, David, Soloman, Paul, Peter, Simon, and Judas. As the greatest man ever sent to the world, he is the official church historian in all matters of church history, doctrine, and official church teachings. No man has a more correct understanding of doctrine than the Great Bwana. Also, as the world's foremost scientist and pill-pushing snake oil salesman, Bwana Bob Thiel fits in well with Gerald Flurry as they both are living in a make-believe fantasy world.
Check out his latest made-up fantasy about one of his trips to Israel and the Ark of the Covenant. In a LONG article that none of his African followers gives a rat's ass about, he goes into great detail about the Ark of the Covenant. As with all of his articles it involves a lot of Catholic and Muslim myths and legends that he tries to use as truth. None of it is new information until the Great Bwana starts talking about HIMSELF, as usual.
God's greatest gift to the world writes:
Back in October 2013, while attempting to take some photos and to video some of the remains of the Church of God on Jerusalem’s Western Hill, I was approached by a Jewish rabbi named Avraham Goldstein of the Diaspora Yeshiva. He asked why I was there, so I explained it. He then asked me if the Continuing (sic) Church of God would like to be involved in an archaeological project related to that general area. He mentioned doing excavations related to what some believe is David’s tomb, located below. Many consider that only a legend and not the real location–though the actual location of David’s tomb has not been verified in many centuries. However a Jewish rabbi who claimed to visit it in 1163 A.D. stated it was below this particular Mt. Zion.
Avraham Goldstein also believes that the ark of the covenant may be directly below or near it via tunnels. He offered to take me below in the tunnels on my next visit to Jerusalem. I told him that I was interested, but I have not been to Israel since. Yet, I expect to go again within the next several years.
The Great Bwana expects you to believe that a Jewish Rabbi would walk up to him and immediately invite him to start helping with an archaeological dig. The sheer stupidity reigns supreme here! If anything, this rabbi saw another rich American Evangelical who would have money to dump into another archeological project that the Government of Israel was not interested in. Little did this Rabbi know that the one man in all of Israel that day that he decided to ask had no money and no real church to back any project.
This is the face of the Church of God today and why it is so totally irrelevant. Jesus is pushed to the sidelines while unimportant topics and fantastical beliefs are always at the forefront.
28 comments:
I believe there is nothing that Bob will not lie about any more. It astounds me at some of the claims he makes.
I read that drivel last night at random. Really badly written piece. Kind of a surprise, usually he does better on posts like that. But he just couldnt quit talking about himself instead.
Bobs post is simply a grasp for legitimacy, any legitimacy.
The Rabbi in question couldn’t give a darm about Thiel or ‘his’ church, unless Bob could offer something tangible to him.
Cash in particular. Money speaks across all boundaries and borders.
But Bob has nothing to offer. Certainly not money.
Once the Rabbi saw this, it’s good bye Bob.
And that besides the doctrinal and theological differences that Bob would bring to the relationship.
He would get swiftly dispatched, simple.
‘Jerusalem syndrome’ is quite real but me thinks Bob suffers from ‘Me syndrome’.
Bob will never have legitimacy in the eyes of Church of God members. This blog has ensured that. Only those in Africa with limited internet access swallow the crap of Bob and his so-called "evangelists" there. His so-called "evangelists" are just as deceptive as he is. I am sure many of the members there are sincere in their beliefs and want to serve God, but they are being lied to by Bob and his leadership there. Having his members there tied down by legalism in countries that already make life difficult instead of preaching Christ crucified and risen and all of the things that were accomplished by that is disgusting beyond belief.
While we like to make fun of Bob for his narcissism and his focus constantly upon himself, he is exactly like David C Pack and Gerald Flurry. Vile, unconverted, disgusting men!
I am sure many of the members there are sincere in their beliefs and want to serve God, but they are being lied to by Bob and his leadership there. Having his members there tied down by legalism in countries that already make life difficult instead of preaching Christ crucified and risen and all of the things that were accomplished by that is disgusting beyond belief.
In truth, some of Bob's African attendees are fairly mainstream Protestant Christians, who because of their great poverty believe it is appropriate that they show support for their local evangelists who pretend to hold various odd beliefs in order to get funding and material aid from wealthy Americans. If Bob is in town, they'll happily show up to church on a Saturday, then on Sunday they'll meet with their evangelist/leader under the banner of a different church whose American benefactor has come for a visit.
It's possible that the Rabbi took the same approach as the African 'evangelists'.
If, by some extremely remote chance, Bob would be involved in an uncovering of the Ark, I can foresee him taking presumptive risks - possibly suffering the same fate as Uzzah (2 Sam 6) or Belloq and the Germans in Raiders.
Oh, remember how Stan Rader and Dr Kuhn were going to sue George Lucas for plagiarizing their Ark story?
Trying to find and excavate the Ark of the Covenant just prior to the tribulation is an act of vandalism. So Flurry and others want it found to boost their membership, no matter that it would probably be destroyed in WW3. It's so callous.
Does the name Uzzah ring a bell with anyone?
6:56
In Bob's case, Legion is more appropriate.
Heh, you know double portioned, almost arrested, wants to be a two witness Elisha Amos Bob would probably end up like Uzzah if he managed to come across the relic.
Does Bob actually think the poorly written articles he puts up are historical and accurate? that was ht biggest batch of nonsense I have ever read. Totally inaccurate. I do love the fact, if it is even true, that the rabbi was ready to take him for a lot of money. How rich that would have been to see Bobby lose his money on someone else get rich scheme, much like what he is doing right now by running his shame of a church. What a sad example he sets for his kids by publicly telling such lies!
Yeah, sometimes he'll come out with an interesting historical tidbit, but he usually bulldozes it by having to tie everything back to Polycarp and then promote himself. I can see why Meredith told him he was "bugging" people with his narcissistic approach.
The ark was a part of the Old Covenant. It disappeared sometime before the Babylonian captivity. Tradition has it that Jeremiah hid it in a cave somewhere in Israel. I suspect he took and hid it, because he understood a New Covenant was coming, and the ark was going to be a part of an obsolete one. The ark is most certainly a decayed relic be now, since its been over 2500 years since it was last seen. And the ark of the New Covenant that is in heaven is the one that is the real one. The Mosaic one was merely a copy.
BTW, some evangelical, fundamentalists, Protestants are ark crazy as well. They don't believe in the British-Israel nonsense, but they are obsessed with the Jews rebuilding the temple and setting up the priesthood and the sacrifices again. One young man I heard said the Temple Institute already had vestments, and other temple items already made for the soon coming rebuilding of it, and the rabbi's all carried cell phones, so when the day came, everybody could be notified at once! That young preacher was so excited! You would've thought he was Jewish himself the way he was so worked up!
Mount Nebo, according to the story. Of course there are also tales about it being hidden on the Temple Mount or elsewhere.
But at its core its a hollow wooden shrine with a very heavy gold lid. The chance of it surviving intact to the present day is pretty low.
Jeremiah did put purchase documents in an earthen vessel "that they may continue many days" - Jer 32:14 - and the whole tenor of the chapter seems to be that things are preserved to be found, uncovered, at Christ's return - vs 37-44. One thing may be the original ark of the covenant.
Oh yeah. I remember some of the claims. One weirdo insisted that he somehow got under the Temple Mount and not only found the Ark but the cross of Christ with fresh blood dripping from the Cross onto the Ark.
There have been some narratives coming out of Ethiopia on the Ark. The Beta Israel community does more than claim Israelite ancestry, the majority of the tribe moved to Israel in the 1990s. I used to know more about these folks as well as about the Lemba tribe of Africa, who also have proven Jewish ancestry. Unfortunately if you don't exercise certain knowledge or facts regularly, they begin to fade.
I forgot the names of the explorers and historians from Ethiopia who claimed to have known of and seen the Ark, hidden in Ethiopia, but it was described as a wood base or frame, covered in gold, with the wood having deteriorated leading to its collapse centuries ago.
The story could be another lead, or just local folklore. HWA occasionally spoke of Haille Selassie, who was known as the Lion of Judah. A Jamaican sect knows Selassie as Ras Tafari, and considers him to have been a holy figure whom they follow. We know them as being
Rastafarians. There is a version of the Bible written in Ethiopic, which I learned about from watching Dr. Gene Scott during the 1980s. Dr. Scott, a human polyglot, used to compare scriptures in different ancient languages to obtain a more precise meaning of them. He usually included Ethiopic, because tradition had one or more of the apostles ministering to followers of Jesus Christ in Ethiopia.
So much can be learned from people of African cultures. This is why I hold today's ignorant ones who are against Critical Race Theory in such disdain. What are they afraid of???
Anon 8:28:00 PM PDT
‘This is why I hold today’s ignorant ones against Critical Race Theory in such disdain’.
Well there we have it.
Maybe their concerns are legitimate?
Your rather casual dismissal of their concern would have us believe otherwise.
Having listened to Afro Americans commentators like Peggy Hubbard, David Wells, Leo Terrell, Thomas Sowell, Denzel Washington, Candice Owen, David Webb and numerous others, one can say their concerns as Afro Americans about Critical Race Theory are well founded. They find it utterly reprehensible and divisive.
That aside you are absolutely correct about the Lemba tribe of Southern Africa, many who reside in Zimbabwe. I understand they also have ‘Cohanim blood’ flowing through their veins also. This according to British author Tudor Paffit, and has being verified by DNA testing.
So much for BI.
If you're talking about the general (waving hand generally "out there") populace, most of them havent read the core works and just get irrationally defensive over nothing when the term is brought up - which is no didferent than how it was before CRT was even a term in the public conversation. If you mean the media's paid commenters, they tend to include works that arent actually CRT in their target list and complain that they make white people feel BAAAAAAD. Which is completely unnecessary, today's white people were born into the existing society like everyone else.
Outside of that, you do have writers on both sides that bring out good and bad points about it. But you have to delve through a lot of sloganeering and exaggeration to find them.
11:32, Your deliberate usage of the outdated term "Afro-American" is very popular amongst people of a certain mindset. It was largely replaced by the term "African-American" sometime during the '90s.
Critical race theory is a deep process evaluating policies to determine areas in which systemic racism may or may not exist, so that they can be changed and everyone of every color is finally treated equally. Trump branded the very consideration of such policies as indicating hatred of America, and being unpatriotic. His opinion immediately resonated with those who had considered the Obama presidency as being something that never should have happened, and our national disgrace. I find the types of people who oppose CRT to be very predictable and very significant. Just as hope was emerging, just as the murder of George Floyd was finally galvanizing the majority of the American people towards change, another very vocal percentage wrapped themselves in the flag, and jumped on CRT in an effor to yank us back into colonial times as they preferred. They are actually proudly displaying "opposes CRT" on their campaign signs. This is part of the cultural war for your country and each of us as individuals has to decide whether we move forwards, or allow the ignorant amongst us to yank us backwards as compared to the rest of the civilized world, our allies, and the right side of history. Some of our national leaders want to take you backwards, to put you into an American philosophical version of the hijab. I cannot make this any plainer than that.
Anon752, I think you are the same person that claims conservatives are given to conspiracy theories, yet you say conservatives are wanting to treat blacks as in “colonial times”. Preposterous, but consistent with your co-conspiracy theorist Joe “they want to put y’all back in chains!” Biden.
Everyone knows the predictable things you will say. I confess comments like yours are particularly annoying, but I probably should ignore it as it is just the groupspeak of most of the media. jim
The plainest and most evident conclusion based on that post is that you are delusional.
But back on topic, Anon 8:28, yes, there are a few descriptions of the Ethiopian relic out there. Some match the biblical description, some don't. The "replicas" kept in each church throughout the country are usually replicas of a tablet (I would venture that this is so because it is easier to make that than a mockup ark). Though some (not all) sources have claimed that the Axum "ark" is just another of these.
The Lemba make a similar claim, though if I remember correctly, their story is that the relic ultimately either collapsed or destroyed itself at some ancient point and they made a new one?
As far as the Biblical record goes, it is related that the Babylonians penetrated into the temple, even removing the doors from the innermost sanctum. If the Ark and its golden surroundings were still there, its surpisingly that its capture isnt mentioned. But it easily could have been removed earlier in time.
7:52, you have no right, insight, or support for claiming someone used “afro American” to insult. He just pointed out his support of several black commentators/analysts and it makes no sense to demean someone you support.
Frankly, it is an oft changing preference. The NAACP used colored and the UNCF used negro and these organizations have not changed their names. Black seems to be fully acceptable after having given way to African American for some years. Still shaking my head at your initial accusation.
Anon 7:52:00 AM PDT
Your response here to a previous post reveals much about a certain ‘mindset’ that you yourself hold.
One that is rather intolerant of opinions that may differ from your own.
I am sure no offence was intended by the post at 11:32.
I saw none. And I wasn’t looking to be offended.
The post by Anon at 11:32:00 was quite generic and inoffensive I am sure to many, except to those seeking it.
Just viewed a talk show on US tv, where the ‘term Afro American’ was used frequently by the host and audience which was made up of a large portion of ‘Afro Americans’ or ‘people of colour or Black Americans’.
On the Lemba tribe question and their identification with Israel, author Tudor Paffitt has much to say about this in his fine book on the lost tribes of Israel.
5:30, would you classify the talk show you saw as being liberal, conservative, neutral, or apolitical?
Any living language is constantly evolving and refining as its users seek more accurate and precise ways of articulating their ideas. What this means is that if you wish to be part of the game, if you desire to continue to be relevant, you must maintain pace with the latest nuances.
Permit me to illustrate with a question, one that is intended to be answered quickly and instinctively. What image pops into your head when you hear the term "African-American". An American of African ancestry? Now, do you get that exact, same image if you hear the term "Afro-American"? Or, is your image one of a radical black person with a large Afro hairstyle? The difference in terminology can be subtle, and the evocative subtleties lost on some people. It's an example in the subliminal, and subliminal influences can be very powerful in creating imagery. There is the serious, and the subtly cartoonish. Your choice in words might actually be innocent. Or, it could provide a glimpse into your heart, your soul, your basic decency as a human being.
Good first question 10/1/22 at 9:12 PM.
I'd need to watch that US tv talk show to know how to evaluate Anonymous 5:30 PM's intel. I hate to name check "Uncle Tom", but that's still a thing.
Post a Comment