A recurring criticism of this blog (and all of the other blogs which are critical of the Armstrong Churches of God) is that the criticisms voiced here (and elsewhere) are evil and inappropriate. Banned by HWA recently highlighted a good example of this in a post titled You have been WARNED about this blog! The commentator noted: "The continuation of verbal attack and condemnation of the Church of God or any group for that matter, is biblically unsound, sinful and destructive." Never mind that the ACOGs continually criticize Roman Catholics, Protestants, and other faiths - they completely miss the irony inherent in this! More importantly, however, was this a valid criticism of our criticisms? Are such criticisms biblically unsound? Are they sinful and destructive? And, once again, if the answers to those questions are "yes," then what does that suggest about their own criticisms of other folks?
First, it should be noted that the founder of Christianity, Jesus of Nazareth, was continually criticizing the religious leaders of his day! Hence, it is a bit of a stretch to suggest that the practice is not biblically sound. What kind of criticism did Christ level at the religious leaders of his day? He criticized their hypocrisy, inconsistency, emphasis/priorities, pride, leadership style (especially their tendency toward authoritarianism vs. leading by example), and their interpretations of the Torah and God's will (See Matthew 23 and Luke 11), Now that covers a whole lot of territory! Do you recognize any of those same themes/criticisms in the posts that have been critical of the ACOGs and their leadership?
Even so, it should be noted that Jesus NEVER personalized his criticisms of the religious leaders and practices of his day! The Gospels simply do not contain ANY instances where Jesus made derogatory remarks about the personal appearance, speaking, moral character, or educational backgrounds of the folks he criticized. In short, Christ's criticisms always focused on the teachings and examples of the people who were the targets of his remarks. To be clear, Christ's criticisms were NOT personal attacks, and the characterization of criticism as such is discredited by the way that Christ handled these situations. Moreover, as Scripture indicates that Christ lived a sinless life, we must also conclude that criticism of this nature cannot be inherently evil!
Finally, unlike the "Accuser of the brethren" (Satan the Devil) whom ACOG folks are so fond of comparing us to, most of our criticisms of these folks are motivated by a desire to correct destructive behaviors and teachings - NOT to spiritually destroy the target! In other words, we are attempting to point out heretical beliefs and practices for the purpose of helping others to avoid or escape them. Hence, I would suggest that the ACOGs and their leaders heed this admonition found in the book of Proverbs in assessing their reactions to our criticisms: "If you listen to constructive criticism, you will be at home among the wise. If you reject discipline, you only harm yourself; but if you listen to correction, you grow in understanding. Fear of the LORD teaches wisdom; humility precedes honor." (Proverbs 15:31-33)
Lonnie Hendrix
Sadly, some of the biggest critics who used to frequent this site needed to be protected from accurate criticism, or they would cry a river.
ReplyDeleteWell Lonnie, if I remember correctly in the last RCG group I was in it was called "correction" when they pointed out your flaws. You're not wearing the right shoes, You're not wearing the right tie, you must be wearing All of the above in order to give an opening and closing prayer. You women must have your dress just below the knee or more, you cannot wear open sandals or show your toes, you must wear hosiery even if it's 110°, your hair has to be a certain length, and these are just some of the appearance "corrections". You must refer to those above you in the proper reverential manner, you can only date certain people, you must not question the leaders interpretations of scripture, you must all speak and believe the same thing even if proven wrong. Anyway you get the gist of the matter. With these people it's far more than just disagreeing with a few teachings or prophecies that never come true. It's it's being in lockstep with those over you and to criticize is taboo. As was said earlier Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees all sorts of names other than just being hypocrites. He actually went in an overturned the money changers tables drove them all out of the temple with a whip made of cords. I think that's a little bit more than we do here on this blog so whoever wrote that article needs to get over it and read their Bible more if they're going to criticize people that point out the weird stuff RCG requires its members to obey.
ReplyDeleteJust because a church calls itself "The Church of God", and its ministers "God's ministers" does not necessarily mean that it is God's church, or that its ministers actually are God's ministers. Those names are deliberately used to intimidate the unsuspecting, and to throw critics off balance. The general idea is to imply that if you critique even obvious bad, and hypocrisy, you are actually attacking God. Nothing could be further from the truth, in spite of those who think it so.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately most of the groups that descended from HWA took on the communist dictatorship type of government and ANY dissent, questioning or honest critique was met with Stalinist types of reprisals or purges.
ReplyDeleteMy ex minister in LCG actually said it was blasphemy to criticise the ministry...let that sink in. I thought, he either doesn't know what blasphemy is, or he thinks he is God. I am still not sure which one it is. He then went on and gave us a 5 or so point sermon on how we could show our appreciation for the ministry.
ReplyDeleteHow can you appreciate someone who treats members like dirt? My LCG minister did that. Aloof and always needed to be catered to and seen with the right people. If you had money you were on the inside circle. Rarely ever would he carry on a conversation with poorer members.
ReplyDeleteIf ministurds dont like being criticized, then maybe they shouldnt be ministurds?
ReplyDeleteHWA literally wrote that it was blasphemy of the Holy Spirit to criticize him or speak negatively of him. I don't believe that even the pope makes such hyperbolic pronouncements about himself!
ReplyDeleteRyan said...
ReplyDeleteMy ex minister in LCG actually said it was blasphemy to criticise the ministry...let that sink in. I thought, he either doesn't know what blasphemy is, or he thinks he is God.
This is exactly what Rod Meredith taught and Gerald Weston continues. Not that they are God, but they are in the direct line of godly authority. Meredith in 2007: "This is the church of God, right? And Jesus Christ is the head of the church, right? And He can put in place or remove anybody any time He wants. Since He hasn't removed me, anyone who leaves is actually judging Jesus Christ." In a 2013 sermon, Weston said a very similar statement in the context of the ministry making judgments. Those judgments are backed by God, and if you don't abide by the judgment, you are in rebellion against God. The doctrine of ministerial infallibility is alive and well in LCG.
"This is the church of God, right? And Jesus Christ is the head of the church, right? And He can put in place or remove anybody any time He wants. Since He hasn't removed me, anyone who leaves is actually judging Jesus Christ."
ReplyDeleteRod Meredith's comment is exactly what Saul would have said about David. But David wasn't judging God; he was judging Saul. People leave LCG when they discern that Rod Meredith or Gerald Weston are in rebellion against Jesus Christ.
I think I would have to agree
DeleteBy the way...October is pastor appreciation month.🙂
ReplyDelete"This is the church of God, right? And Jesus Christ is the head of the church, right? And He can put in place or remove anybody any time He wants. Since He hasn't removed me, anyone who leaves is actually judging Jesus Christ."
ReplyDeleteLadies and gentlemen, there you have it! Rod Meredith arguing for the continuing leadership of Joseph Tkach Sr., whom God kept in place for three years after Rod rebelled against God's chosen leader and started Global.
I think by this argument, he is actually arguing for the catholic Church... or at very least COG7 whom HWA rebelled against (twice).
DeleteYes. Criticism of church leadership is appropriate and biblical. It is also appropriate and biblical to point out their sins. For example, John MacArthur, Pastor of Grace to You Church, criticized Joel Osteen's ministry, and used an entire one hour sermon to do so. It is vitally important to not spare anyone's feelings when they are acting or preaching wrong from God's perspective. In fact, it is unbiblical if you DID NOT do so.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately most of the groups that descended from HWA took on the communist dictatorship type of government and ANY dissent, questioning or honest critique was met with Stalinist types of reprisals or purges.
Monday, October 3, 2022 at 6:44:00 PM PDT
Yes! Go to the head of the class!
Anon @ 9:03 wrote that HWA taught it was blasphemy of the Holy Spirit to criticize him!?!! Given the fact that HWA had not the slightest clue who the Holy Spirit is, that makes my blood boil! For a fool like HWA, who taught the Holy Spirit was the POWER of God, yet NOT GOD, I find this rich, to say the least.
ReplyDeleteTo this day, the Acogs teach that same heresy. The Flurr(i), teach when you are running low on the HS working in you, go back and fill up on more! Like He is gas for your car. Absolute, utter heretical blasphemy, not to mention the unpardonable sin. What a shameful group of men. Ignorant and arrogant to the nth degree, yet completely blind to all of it.
DW wrote:
ReplyDelete“For a fool like HWA, who taught the Holy Spirit was the POWER of God”.
It appears from this I may be considered a “fool” by association: I suggest that the weight of evidence supports his teaching, not the teaching of traditional Christianity. Some thoughts:
Co-billing
From the Athanasian Creed: "And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal".
The question is, why doesn’t the "Holy Spirit" get co-billing?:
Jn 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
1Jn 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
Rev 5:13b ... Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
Rev 7:10 saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.
Rev 11:15b ... saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
Rev 20:6b they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
Rev 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
Rev 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
Rev 22:1 And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Rev 22:3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel, The Lord [Kyrios] our God (Theos) is one Lord (Kyrios). (Brenton, LXX)
1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God [Theos], the Father... and one Lord [Kyrios] Jesus Christ...
"[Paul] has kept the "one" intact, but has divided the Shema into two parts, with theos (God) now referring to the Father, and kurios (Lord) referring to Jesus Christ... [Paul] is reasserting for the Corinthians that ... there is indeed only one God... but at the same time, he insists that the identity of the one God also includes the one Lord..." (Gordon D. Fee, Pauline Christology, pp.90-91).
Ac 7:55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.
Ac 7:56 "Look," he said, "I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God." (NIV).
The angel answered,
"The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and
the power of the Most High will overshadow you.
(Luke 1:35, NIV).
"... synonymous parallelism (where the second line repeats or reinforces the sense of the first line). In this type of parallelism, then, the two lines together express the poet's meaning; and the second line is not trying to say some new or different thing" (Gordon D. Fee & Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for all its Worth, p.189).
“Holy Spirit” is in synonymous parallelism with “power of the Most High” and “will come upon you” is in synonymous parallelism with “will overshadow you”.
Mk 14:36a And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me:
Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
1Th 4:8b God ... hath also given unto us his [autou] holy Spirit.
(Christ’s Spirit is God’s Spirit by “first cause”].
"God becomes "our Father" through the gift of the Holy Spirit, whom Paul explicitly identifies in Gal 4:6 as "the Spirit of the Son," whom God sent "into out hearts" and who is thus responsible for crying out to God the Father in the language of the Son ("Abba")" (Gordon D. Fee, Pauline Christology, pp.37-39).
Very clearly no trinity as catholics and protestants teach. Good scripture references. Thanks
DeleteIf church members had had the courage to criticize their leaders over the decades the church would not be in the mess it is today. Church government is nothing more than a control apparatus used by the leadership to enslave members and silence them.
ReplyDeleteChrist washed feet.
ReplyDeleteCOG members lick boots.
Even during Worldwide, but even more so now since there are so many splinter groups; every minister and church leadership should be critiqued.
ReplyDeleteSome of them still idolize HWA. If you had a bowel movement in an old Mason jar, and concocted provenance that it was HWA's, Gerald Flurry would probably spend thousands of dollars of his followers' tithe money to buy it!
ReplyDeleteOf course any reasonable thinker would recognize that as idolatry. Just as it is idolatry to claim that ministers from the Armstrong movement (oops, there's that word again!) should be held above criticism or evaluation.
I would agree with Anon 5:15. If you take all of the scriptures together as a whole on the Holy Spirit, and you are not influenced by the thinking of traditional christianity, it appears to be a "power" as opposed to a "person".
ReplyDeleteIf you believe that God is rational and a God of love then you can't support the idea that He would consider it an unpardonable sin to get an understanding wrong. Whether that is the identity of the holy Spirit or Jesus. This is an obvious way to know that such doctrines are of men.
ReplyDeleteThis would also go for CoG leaders making claims about salvation being tied to believing particular teachings.
Thank you, Lonnie. After reading your article, I feel less satanie now. :)
ReplyDeleteMarc,
ReplyDeleteIndeed! I think that we should all feel SATINY now! :)
To Anonymous Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 5:15:00 PM PDT may I say I love your comments and have over the years (if you are the same person who I believe has posted similarly in the past citing various references in support of sound doctrine) so a big THANK YOU from me - a nobody - at least! When I've scanned Banned on various holy days and the comments I've actually learned more from your contributions than I have from many hours of COG sermons! I wish you had a blog or website of your own where all these gems would be posted for all who are thirsty for God's truth!
ReplyDeleteHi 7:34, I am the same person; thanks for comment and I am also a ‘nobody’ - which I like being.
ReplyDelete“... the Bible is an ancient book and makes sense if we look at it in ancient ways” (Peter Enns, The Bible tells me so, p.187).
God’s Truth? All I can say is that whatever I post is my present understanding of what is meant by what the Bible says.
I do not have a blog, but I do have a small website - for some twenty years now - but I don’t really promote it - no one seems too interested in what I believe. So it has ended up being more for storage of some ideas online.
I have posted at Banned for some years but I have not mentioned it before, and am only disclosing it - futurewatch.info - because of your comment.
I hope any expectation about the site from my comments won’t disappoint too much - it’s a bit amateurish for a one man band; still using twenty-year old software, so limited in graphics displayed.
Just for the record I am not interested in starting a church - it’s not for me - just sharing what I have learnt over the years; and I do not put together posts on regular basis - what output that I have had has declined with age.
Regards 5:15