Has the Church of God movement (Armstrong era) ever had a leader that was happy? Have any of them ever found joy in their lives? Have any of them ever marveled at the beauty that surrounds them?
For over eight decades the church has been filled with some of the grumpiest men imaginable. Nothing ever seems to please them so they have to find fault in EVERYTHING around them. This is perfect fodder for their erroneous belief that Satan is the god of this world. We can't really blame them when they have no knowledge of the "christ" they claim to follow. That creature is weak and impotent compared to the all-powerful entity they call Satan who lurks behind every corner of the world ready to devour them.
Today, our Great Bwana to Africa and 150 Caucasians did not put up his usual Thanksgiving anti-football schtick (at least, so far). This day he went darker and tired to prove the Pilgrims, Christians, and Thanksgiving have anti-Semitic roots.
After quoting an article from Israel 365, the all-knowing Bwana says:
Anti-semitism has been a factor in the Greco-Roman Catholic as well as Protestant religions for a long time–even though the ORIGINAL catholic church was considered to basically be Jewish and was not anti-sermitic.
But for those who were not truly converted, anti-semitism crept in. It is not that all Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants are anti-semitic, it is just that many of their important early leaders and influencers were.
After a lot of bloviating, Beto writes:
Let me add that various Protestant Reformers and many popes and patriarchs were anti-semitic.
Leaders esteemed by the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and Protestants have all advocated horrible antisemitism. They were NOT real Christians.
While people who were referred to as “Christians” have committed atrocities and anti-Semitic persecutions, no real Christian would have done that (or at least would have repented if he/she sinned that way). Instead many who have claimed Christ have caused “the way of truth” to be blasphemed (2 Peter 2:2).
Let me add that there were a LOT of COG ministers, evangelists, and certain leaders who were anti-Semitic to the core. It would show up every once in a while in church publications which actually got the church in trouble many times.
When they opened the Ambassador Auditorium and were actively courting major Los Angeles donors (non-COG members) to be supporters of the concert series they hit a brick wall with the Jewish benefactors of Los Angeles. The church then put the PR Department into major overdrive trying to eradicate this belief. Booklets were pulled, articles pulled and sermons were pulled. It was soon after this that the church saw Herbert galavanting off to Israel numerous times as he swooped in with Stuebin Crystal gifts and loads of cash trying to impress Israeli officials. The church tried to clean up its image. Its biggest obstacle was Itzhak Perlman, the great Israeli-American violinist. He turned many Jewish donors against the church and the Ambassador Internation Cultural Foundation. He also refused to perform in the Auditorium due to the antisemitism of the church and vocally expressed that reason to the public many times.
Beto Grumpy Pants continues on with this:
It is not just Jews that are hated or will be in the future. Throughout history, true Christians have sometimes been called “Jews” and have been subject to persecution supposedly directed towards Jews. True Christians also had to suffer through the so-called Inquisition, which utilized torture against those that had Church of God beliefs–and more is expected in the future.
Beto loves to trot on this narrative as he tries to bolster the impression his church and his group of followers are the ONLY true Christians on the face of the earth. Of course, as the ONLY true Christian church on earth, this is going to piss off a lot of people who will soon be persecuting them.
Unless you repent of your unbelief in him and his message you too will suffer persecution at the hands of Christians. If you repent and join his merry band of Truthists, you too will be saved.
More persecution will be coming from those who falsely claim to be Christian, and that will include persecution of true and real Christians.
Hopefully you will have God’s Spirit and the mindset of the persecuted, not the persecutors.
25 comments:
Has the Church of God movement (Armstrong era) ever had a leader that was happy?
At least one may or may not be happy but is quite obviously gay!
Bobby does indeed have to scrounge to put up the three posts on his website daily such as antisemitism on Thanksgiving. As of 1:20 PM Pacific he has yet to put up his third spiel which I predict will be anti-football.
In my opinion, Bob Thiel always was, is, and always will be an arrogant jackass.
Excuse me, Bob. Did you just literally say "hopefully, you will have God's spirit"? What on earth does that mean? Are you referring to the Holy Spirit? You make it sound like "got milk?"
Aarrgghh. Please STOP playing church. The fools who believe you, including yourself, will be condemned for your lazy, copy and paste from HWA, Acme school of Theology India campus, nonsense. The Holy Spirit IS God. He indwells the believer. There is one God, not two. Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Binitarianism is b.s. Have you never read vast chapters in Isaiah that say over and over there is one God?
Either get your act together, ditch the cog heresies and get a real Thd or stop playing with people's eternal destinies. You shame the Name of God and unless you repent, you will pay the ultimate price. God help you see before it's too late.
One of the most fundamental problems with Armstrongism is that many years ago (and this is in the Autobiography of HWA, Herbert confused the preparatory steps for debate (to assist Loma's brother in winning a debate) with the steps taken in seeking truth.
A debate is an exercise in proving one side or the other of an argument in a convincing fashion to judges who are observing in a formal setting. Proof-texting (seeking out and using reference materials which support the side you have chosen or been assigned) is totally appropriate in this exercise, because the participants are being judged based on their oratory skills, logic, persuasiveness, and rebuttal skills. While the winner or winners of the debate are judged in having done a superior job in "proving" their side, the result of the debate is not that the winners have discovered truth. Truth seeking is the result of following an evidentiary trail, and considering all of the relevant facts in a manner which allows that evidence to lead to truth.
Anyone who claims to be a truth-seeker, or truth teacher, who relies on proof-texting (and it is SOooo easy to recognize a proof-texter!) really only has very limited knowledge of any given subject at hand, because he has excluded all the evidence which would counter his conclusion, and has provided only the evidence which supports his conclusion. Even the people in LCG and the other ACOGs who are themselves only schooled in proof-texting will not follow him because they can see that while his ego tells him that he is a leading authority, the ideas he expresses, and his understandings are very superficial! Of course, they're going to rely upon and trust the more highly skilled proof-texters, their own ministers, over Bob.
I don't know how it is in the splinters of today, but back in the WCG "golden era", your research was just fine so long as your conclusions agreed with the official teachings of the church. The truth was only the truth if it agreed with HWA's truth.
"In my opinion, Bob Thiel always was, is, and always will be an arrogant jackass."
I was around the early days of LCG when Bob thought he was the brightest theologian the church had ever had. He thought he knew more than the ministry and regularly told them so. He was thought of by the members as an arrogant ass. Rod Meredith was captivated by him for a while till he woke to Bob's lust for power and recognition. Meredith refused to ordain him and to recognize him as beneficial to the church. We left before Meredith kicked him out of the church, I regret to have missed that part!
He does love that "no true scotsman" fallacy.
@RSK: You beat me to the "no true Scotsman" fallacy punch. Thousands of denominations, sects and kooks lob this fallacy at one another on the regular like it's some kind of holy hand grenade. But all we see are clowns putting on their make up and big shoes.
Its a way of self-absolvement. If you can categorize others as not being "true" whatever, you dont have to feel any sense of embarassment over their bad behavior.
Bob loves to talk about true Christians vs. false Christians. But notice that while he talks a lot about his being a prophet, he doesn't say much about false prophets. Hasn't for many years. Something like 98% of the "false prophets" references on his site are from when he was in LCG. Curious, isn't it?
DW writes:
“The Holy Spirit IS God”; “in Isaiah ... over and over there is one God?”
Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all...
1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father... and one Lord Jesus Christ... [NT ‘shema’].
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
I disagree with the first observation; but agree with the second - Paul is in agreement with Isaiah.
Ac 16:6b having been kept by the Holy Spirit from preaching the word in the province of Asia. (NIV).
Ac 16:7b they tried to enter Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus would not allow them to. (NIV).
Looking at the suggested chiastic parallelism, as presented above from the NIV, but see the AV - different Greek manuscript], the Holy Spirit = the Spirit of Christ. Cp. also Romans 8:9-10.
1Co 2:10a But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit:...
In 1Co 2:10 God’s Spirit is to be understood in the sense of ‘first cause’; this implies that it is Christ’s Spirit in the sense of 'second cause'.
(In Hebrew thought, the “first cause” is not always distinguished from “intermediate” causes).
A related concept to the concept of first cause/second cause, (or another way of putting it), is the Principle of Agency.
C. S. Keener, in "The Gospel of John," in the “Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels”, notes that “the agency principle ... was pervasive in the ancient Mediterranean world” (p.429).
For example in the accounts of Christ’s encounter with the Centurion, Matthew relates it from the “principal” perspective, while Luke from the “agency” perspective.
A good OT example of “first cause/second cause” is in the words of Solomon:
1Ki 5:3 ... because of the wars waged against ... David from all sides, he could not build a temple for the Name of the LORD his God until the LORD put his enemies under his feet.
God, as ‘first cause’, put David’s enemies under his feet; but it was David, as ‘second cause’ that accomplished it.
Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
God, in the OT, refers to the One God, the Father, as first cause. In light of NT revelation, the God-being that interacted with “the fathers” was the preincarnate Jesus Christ, as ‘second cause’.
Lk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give [didomi] unto him [autos] the throne of his father David:
Lk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
2Ch 9:8 Blessed be the LORD thy God, which delighted in thee to set thee on his throne, to be king for the LORD thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do judgment and justice.
Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave [didomi] him [autos] to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, (ESV).
It is argued from Luke that Jesus Christ will literally reign on the throne of David during the Messianic Age. It is suggested that this is a wrong conclusion, based on at least, a misunderstanding of the concept of ‘causes/agencies’ or ‘delegation’.
God will give the throne of David to Jesus Christ who will delegate human Davidic kings to rule as His vice-regents; cp. Christ delegating the revelation which God gave him:
“The content of the book comes from its author, Jesus Christ. Yet even Christ is not the final author but a mediator, for he receives the revelation from God the Father (“which God gave him to show”). John is the human instrument for communicating what he has seen by the agency of Christ’s messenger or angel (cp. 22:6,8,16)...” (Alan F. Johnson, Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, p.416).
I was appalled several years ago when I started seeing antisemitic comments and holocaust denial on our ex-Armstrongite blogs. I wondered where these people had come from. From everything I had read before, I believed that societal evolution had elevated humanity above the paradigms and philosophies of the Third Reich.
But, now I understand that they're serving up lunch for them in Mara Lago.
Try almost the entire history of Christianity...
Driveby anonymous Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:12:00 PM PST smeared, "But, now I understand that they're serving up lunch for them in Mara Lago (referring to the philosophies of the Third Reich).
MY COMMENT - Instead of talking out of your ass, maybe you can explain how The President who resides at Mara Lago is an antisemitic and holocaust denier given he moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, negotiated the Abrahamic Accords and has Jewish members of his family?
It is so easy to be an anonymous drive by smearer. Your asinine comment reminds me of loony Lonnie who smeared me and accused me of practicing political extremism here on Banned for having these beliefs: lower taxes, less government regulation, peace through strength, belief in the rule of law including border security (which every other Country in the World except us seems to have), love for our Country and our Constitution. Since these are also the same beliefs of the resident of Mara Lago, perhaps you can tell us all what is antisemitic third Reichish about these beliefs?
Loony Lonnie couldn't/wouldn't. So, I won't hold my breath for you either! It's much easier to just smear and falsely accuse.
Richard
Richard, If I were talking out my ass, you'd know it because first your eyes would start to water, and then you'd most likely faint. Also, I no longer post under my name, because folks like yourself are disrespectful and make up names for people with whom they disagree, as does a certain politician we all know. I'm fine with "drive by poster" if you insist.
As to your list of foundational principles of both our country and the Republican Party, I believe in them too, and (surprise!) so does Lonnie, if you've ever read the articles he regularly publishes on his "God Cannot be Contained" blog site. I do not have a problem with a single one of the principles you enumerated, and they are not your own exclusives. They are all owned by and subject to interpretation by the citizenry. I do, however, have a really big problem with the ways in which some apply them. You see, there is one dynamic which has also been a foundation of our government since the time of Henry Clay, a little principle known as "compromise". It is used so that the approach of govenment will be even-handed in cases where the interpretations or applications of these principles differ from one another. The reason compromise is so important is that the process brings all on board. It unites, so that we do not think of one law as being a "Democrat" law, and another as being a "Republican" law. This unity promites respect in the rule of law. Without the support of those governed, authoritarianism takes over. If you have a president who withholds his support from states governed by the opposite party from himself, that is both punitive and authroitarian. It sets off a war which does not go away with the next election cycle. And, if you do not respect the integrity of the elections, even though there is no proof of fraud, such that all your lawsuits alleging fraud are thrown out of court by your own people whom you appointed, even your own followers will give up on voting.
Someone who is deeply committed to the principles you outlined will uphold them even if they go against his own self-interests. What a powerful example of integrity that would provide. Leading by example, taking the high ground, both of which would preserve unity rather than fomenting division. Back in the mid-1990s, I knew that we were headed for trouble, when I heard Rush Limbaugh proclaim that "We're not going to compromise with the liberals any more!. Boy, did the Dittoheads ever eat that up. I naively believed that we had enough checks and balances designed into the system by our forefathers to counter something so tyraniccal. It took a while, and the virtual hijacking of a political party, but come 2017, I began to witness in horror as paths were found around a considerable proportion of these checks of balances.
Allow me to introduce myself. I'm a traditional conservative, a conservative as conservatives were known to be several decades ago, when we had the types of leaders who united us, as opposed to deliberately throwing us off balance and into constant fear just to satisfy their own lusts for power. I'm a globalist conservative who believes that peace and prosperity can only exist if we cooperate with our internatiinal neighbors, as we exercise the great American principle of compromise for the greater good, and encourage them to do so as well.. The existential problems which face us globally must be dealt with on a global level. They will not go away if we ignore them or fail to acknowledge them. No one person's personality is strong enough to make problems go away. Solving problems fairly can only be a group effort, not a unilateral one, or autocratic one. E Pluribus Unim.
Two more points, Richard. First, I was totally pissed at the demonstrators who took to the streets when Pres.Trump took office, because here he hadn't done a single thing yet, and they weren't even giving him a chance. I knew that candidates generally say many things during their campaigns, playing to their base, in order to get them out to vote for them. And then, as they take office, they end up adopting a more centrist position, and that is the position from which they govern. And, that is also the point at which they become all the people's president. President Trump did not do that.
Secondly, I watched as he began to dismantle all of the policies and alliances which were put in place following World War II, designed to prevent World War III. Basically, he was enacting the John Birch Society's agenda. Although it was horrifying to watch, in the interest of fairness, I even took a wait and see attitude on that. Where he finally crossed the red line and lost me was Charlotteville.
3:46 and 6:23 PM,
I am glad I didn't hold my breathe. At the end of your long-winded flatulence, you failed to answer my simple request which read "maybe you can explain how The President who resides at Mara Lago is an antisemitic and holocaust denier given he moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, negotiated the Abrahamic Accords and has Jewish members of his family?"
You take a page from the Loony Lonnie approach of smearing someone and then offering a longwinded diversion attempting to deflect from the fact that you can't support your smear when it is called out. This is what you do! Smear and deflect.
Why would/should I spend any of my VALUABLE time at Loonie Lonnie's blog? He considers me an extremist because of my aforementioned stated beliefs. (Note: he used the word "extremism" and not "extremist". He then called me a liar as if he thinks the people who read Banned are too stupid to know that the two words are one in the same). You claim that you believe in the principles that I believe, and that Lonnie believes in them too, yet you both are not extremists practicing extremism. How does that work? (I already know the answer).
You must believe everything the corporate mainstream media tells you. Instead of taking the soundbite out of context, try putting your bias aside and listening to the entire Charlottesville comment.
But again, you failed to answer my simple request which read "maybe you can explain how The President who resides at Mara Lago is an antisemitic and holocaust denier given he moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, negotiated the Abrahamic Accords and has Jewish members of his family?"
Like Loonie Lonnie, you smear and run. And if someone such as I call your smear out for what it is, then you deflect.
Richard
I expected you to respond exactly as you did, Richard, and you did not disappoint. You're right on script.
The militia groups who were present at Charlottesville most certainly did not miss the true meaning of Trump's remarks, in spite of his attempted clean up after the fact. They are his version of the SS, were present and accounted for at the January 6 insurrection, and are heavily populated by former military personnel. They listen attentively for his dog whistles, eagerly waiting for the order. They also recognize his public, tactical deflections for exactly what they are, a mask for his true feelings and intentions.
Oddly enough, though, I find myself in the unusual position of sincerely hoping that you are correct. This is one thing I'd really take pleasure in being wrong about. I really hope that this is all a concoction of what you call the MSM, and that Trump actually is a benign, misunderstood genius who loves America. I hope that it's all just a harmless illusion that right wing demonstrators bring their guns to the pro-Trump protests, to polling places, and to our seats of government, because it surely appears to me as if they are armed for civil war. I don't believe for one moment that he has been repudiated and vanquished in the mid term elections, in spite of the red wave having become a disappointing red trickle, or that he or they will be going away any time soon.
Gee, Richard! Can't help but wonder. Do you actually think Trump should get a pass for his long term embracement of white nationalist antisemitic groups and his dining in his home with antisemites and holocaust deniers just cause he did a couple good optic things for Israel?
7:17:
I'll will give one thing. The white supremacist Nick Fuentes got a seat at the table because Trump does not have a Chief of Staff playing traffic cop with the President. The President needs a Chief of Staff who vets and does background checks before anyone gets close proximity to Trump. That's on Trump, and he needs to fix it. So, someone not vetted got close to Trump giving people like you the ammo to say what you said. The problem is you paint 74 million voters who voted for his policies in 2020 with same brush implying that they are supporting someone who is antisemitic and holocaust deniers - and may be the same themselves. That is where the smearing comes in. NOTHING could be farther from the truth.
There was no January 6 insurrection. Now that the Republicans have the House, I would hope that there would be a new January 6 Committee to add balance and investigate the following: Why is there video showing Capital police waiving protesters into the Capitol? Why does video footage of the protesters inside the Capitol is marked "Jayden X", a known Antifa member and why Jayden X himself was not arrested? Why didn't Nancy Pelosi secure the Capitol since it was her job as Speaker, and why didn't Nancy Pelosi take up Trump's offer in a letter he wrote to Pelosi offering the National Guard? Why did she decline the offer? Why wasn't Pelosi called to testify? Why weren't Pelosi's phone records subpoenaed? Why did the three Capital Police shown in video leave their guard at the door entrance to the Chamber standing down seconds before a fourth officer inside the chamber door shot and killed Ashley Babbit? Why did these three guards outside the Chamber door stand down giving the officer inside a clear shot to kill an unarmed protester misguided though she was?
Repeat a lie over and over again until it eventually becomes true. Hopefully, you didn't actually believe the MSM lie that January 6 was worse than 9/11. It wasn't even the worst attack on the US Capitol but then who cares about history when there is a propaganda narrative to spread.
Richard
"There was no January 6 insurrection!"
I forgive you. That statement makes it perfectly obvious that you have not watched the 3 hour tunnel video, recorded by security cameras. If those brave police officers defending its entrance had not fought so valiantly, the coup would most certainly have been successful. That's where the real fight was. The cartoonish characters looking as if they were taking part in their Senior Class Prank as they went on their rampage through the halls and offices were just a high visibility distraction.
I've got the ultimate litmus test for whether or not it was an insurrection. What would our perceptions of the event be if the same numbers of people had done the exact same things on the exact same day, with just one little change? That they were Islamic, Arabic people?
Anonymous November 29, 2022 at 7:11:00 AM PST said, "Gee, Richard! Can't help but wonder. Do you actually think Trump should get a pass for his long term embracement of white nationalist antisemitic groups and his dining in his home with antisemites and holocaust deniers just cause he did a couple good optic things for Israel?"
MY COMMENT- My prior comment on Nov 29 at 7:28 applies in response. Additionally, Trump has NOT held a long-term embracement of white nationalist antisemitic groups, and never has. Your statement is completely untrue. Perhaps you are confusing Trump with Hillary Clinton who once called card carrying KKK member Senator Robert Byrd "her mentor". Or perhaps you are confusing Trump with President Obama who maintained a long friendship with antisemite Louis Farrakhan and was photo'd with him on a couple of occasions. Or, maybe you are confusing Trump with President Biden who spoke at his segregationist friend Strom Thurmond's funeral.
I suggest you Google "Donald Trump honored in Israel". Why would Israel honor Trump in various ways including naming a street after him if your false allegations were true?
Richard
November 29, 2022 at 9:21:00 PM PST said, "I've got the ultimate litmus test for whether or not it was an insurrection. What would our perceptions of the event be if the same numbers of people had done the exact same things on the exact same day, with just one little change? That they were Islamic, Arabic people?"
MY COMMENT - If the questions and circumstances I asked in my comment on November 29, 2022 at 7:28:00 were the same circumstances and events, then my conclusion would be the same regardless of if they were Islamic or Arabic.
Why didn't Nancy Pelosi take up Trump's written offer for National Guard protection on that day?
Richard
"Why didn't Nancy Pelosi take up Trump's written offer for National Guard protection on that day?"
That is what is known as a rhetorical question, made so by the fact that only Nancy knows the answer.
My guesses (and these are some good ones) would be that she actually expected Trump to behave himself presidentially and to promote peace and the orderly transfer of power, since Trump knew that he would be eligible to run once again for the office of president. Not accepting his offer sent him the message that she trusted him, which is actually a positive thing, and often results in a positive response.
Conversely, my next guess would be that she did not want the National Guard present, accessible and available to Trump (commander in chief) to use in effecting a coup. This could have been her way of deescalating the situation in advance, having observed his methods and the threats he made during the unrest following the murder of George Floyd.
Trump departed from norms in so many ways, that in many peoples' minds, anything was possible. He was a man who constantly exceeded hypothetical worst case scenarios, and his tweets were divisive, offensive, and generally pretty damned abominable. During 2016-2017, he had to be "hard-sold" to traditional Republicans, the Reagan or Goldwater Republicans. I listened day after day as Sean Hannity and Dennis Prager pointed out such positives as that he would be appointing conservative judges and justices, finally killing Obamacare, and straightening out the confusion surrounding restrooms. Many people were convinced to hold their noses and support a president who could triumph over "the liberals" (as if liberals were monolithic as a group).
Where does it go from here? I don't believe Trump will win his party's nomination in 2024. He has alienated all but his base. DeSantis will be the Republican candidate, and Trump will then go off and start his own party, somewhat like Ross Perot, but more like an angry, vengeful Perot on steroids. Conservatives will be irreconcilably divided, and another Democrat president will be elected. Bob Thiel, if you are tuned into this discussion, I'm going to be really pissed at you if you ruin my speculations by stealing them for one of your prophecies!
Post a Comment