Quanah Parker, Comanche War Chief
The Hornet Promise
Classical Armstrongism and its Confusing Native American Policy
By Huckleberry
Back a few decades ago, my wife and I were eating in a restaurant with a WCG couple in a large city in the American Southwest. He was a long-standing deacon and prominent in the congregation. We were just beginning to eat when he went off on a tirade about Hispanics and Native Americans living in the State. The summation was that those people did not belong in the United States and this land was not theirs. It was Israel’s land and they should have been driven out. His wife, fork in hand, said in an emphatic voice, “God said to wipe them out!” My heart sank for three reasons. First, I am of Native American descent. Second, the couple knew I was of Native American descent. Three, I had heard this view expressed many times before but it always surprised me. You don’t often hear someone blatantly advocate genocide when you were expecting to enjoy a little “Christian” fellowship in a leisurely setting. The deacon later became an avid Trump follower. And this little tawdry piece of WCG history furnishes the backdrop to this essay.
Misidentification of Native Americans as Canaanites
For those who are still trying to hawk Herman Hoeh’s ideas, their nemesis is the science of genetics. I will not go into detail but, in general, genetics demonstrates that Herman Hoeh was dramatically wrong about the identity of races of people and their migrations. Hoeh asserted that Native Americans are descendants of Canaan and this was a nice fit with British-Israelism. Native Americans became the inhabitants of the land that “Israel” was to inherit, North America, and their role in “Israel’s” national destiny was described in the book of Deuteronomy (Deut. 7:1-5).
But scientists now know that Native Americans are a combination of early Eurasians (who looked like Europeans) and East Asians. And these two groups of people mixed before that invaded North America from Beringia. They also know that there is genetic continuity between the Canaanites and the later Phoenicians and finally the modern-day Lebanese. Hoeh had Native Americans and many other peoples profoundly misidentified. For more on this, see:
https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2022/04/the-patriarch-canaan-classical.html
A Patchwork Dogma
It is difficult to say what the Armstrongist dogma on the Native Americans actually is. Publications issued from the Armstrongist press are at odds with what is believed in the Pulpit and in the Pews. And WCG leadership seems to have made no effort to reconcile the Press, the Pulpit and the Pews. Perhaps, no effort was made to achieve consistency because it just was not an important topic. Or maybe the Press had a public profile to be careful about and the Pulpit and Pews did not so they followed separate courses.
The Armstrongist Press published a very empathetic article about Native Americans in the February 1973 issue of the Plain Truth Magazine. It offered Armstrongist solutions to social problems but it was positively inclined to Native Americans. The July-August 1973 issue of the Plain Truth Magazine condemned genocide as a great evil and cited the decimation of the Native Americans in support of this view. Garner Ted Armstrong, in a personal letter to me, stated that he had never heard his Dad say anything negative about Native Americans. Herbert W. Armstrong was of Quaker background and it is worth mentioning that the Quaker colonists always had a special interest in helping Native Americans and fared well with Native American tribes while other early American colonists, such as the Scots-Irish, did not. Later, President Grant turned over the operation of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the Quakers in certain territories. Finally, at a Friday evening Bible Study back in the Seventies in the Field House at Big Sandy, Ronald Dart received a question from the audience. Someone asked if Native Americans should have been exterminated. Dart promptly answered, no, that if God had wanted that he would have sent a prophet to the President in Washington, D.C. and would have informed the President of that.
By contrast, in the ministry and laity of the WCG, one found a different disposition towards Native Americans. I have many anecdotes like the one that begins this essay. I will add one more. I was at a Bible Study in the WCG congregation in a large Midwestern city. A Pastor and a Local Church Elder were giving the study on stage in a large auditorium. The LCE went through an explanation of how God wanted the Canaanites to be destroyed so the Israelites would not follow after their gods. This he then applied to Native Americans and further explained that they should have been exterminated by European settlers of North America so that people would not adopt Native American religions. He made some reference to totem poles. This struck me as being very unusual because European settlers brought their religious package with them and there is no history of Europeans adopting Native American religions. Native American religions typically died a swift death after the European contact. But the really odd aspect of this is that the Pastor did not correct the LCE regarding this outlandish view. So, the audience received a message of necessary genocide with tacit acceptance from the Armstrongist Pulpit.
Overall, the idea of exterminating Native Americans was never published, that I can find, by the WCG Headquarters Press. But it was fairly widely believed in the Pulpit and the Pews. It is difficult to believe that Headquarters did not know about this unless there was rigorous control of information flowing from the local areas back to headquarters.
The Hornet Promise: Armstrongism Misses the Mark
The Pulpit and the Pews were also burdened by a misinterpretation of scripture on this topic. The ministry and the laity, in my experience, always seem to resort to the argument that the early European settlers of North America did not exterminate the Native Americans as God intended and this was a part of their national sin for which God would punish them. This was a nicely parallel to the Old Testament scenario of the settling of the Promised Land by ancient Israel. And this view clearly emphasizes the need for a violent genocide. And it seems to justify how Native Americans were actually treated by the early European settlers. The idea being that the Native Americans got treated badly but they really should have been totally exterminated so they got off easy. I heard a similar explanation to this in Spokesman Club. But this approach does not agree with the Biblical scenario.
God did not originally intend for the Israelites to fight against the Canaanites. And he did not intend for the Canaanites to be exterminated. This is pointed out in the Jewish Study Bible in the gloss for Deut. 7:2. The gloss refers the reader to Exodus 23. Exodus 23: 27-29 (ESV) states the Hornet Promise:
“I will send my terror before you and will throw into confusion all the people against whom you shall come, and I will make all your enemies turn their backs to you. And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the Hittites from before you.”
But something happened between the time of the Hornet Promise and the entry into Palestine:
“Then I said to you, ‘Do not be in dread or afraid of them. The LORD your God who goes before you will himself fight for you, just as he did for you in Egypt before your eyes, and in the wilderness, where you have seen how the LORD your God carried you, as a man carries his son, all the way that you went until you came to this place.’ Yet in spite of this word you did not believe the LORD your God (Deut 1: 29-32, ESV”
The outcome is that the Israelites are in the Book of Joshua full participants in the conquest. God instructs all the men of the Trans-Jordan tribes to cross to assist. When they descend on Jericho, the Priests and the people form the invading host. The Hornet Promise was that Israel would just be observing. Now, after their unfaithfulness, they must shed blood. The violence is a punishment not a tool of righteousness.
The focus of the Armstrongist Pulpit and Pews is on the fact that the Israelites did not wipe out the Canaanites and thereby sinned. The focus should be on the fact that the Israelites did not trust in God so that they would not have to fight at all. The call for genocide from some quarters should have been a call, instead, for trust so that genocide could be avoided. The Armstrongist who espoused these ideas did not go back far enough in the chain of cause and effect. They stopped short of God’s original intent. And this cloaked the real issue of trust in God and made it look like the destruction of the Native Americans was a justified and maybe even a patriotic action in American History (the connection to patriotism was also something I heard is Spokesman Club).
Overall, it is difficult to say what the actual Armstrongist dogma on Native Americans actually was. If we had a time machine we could go back and conduct some interviews so we could establish what people actually had in their hearts beyond what writing has come down to us. I would characterize the dogma as being inconsistent.
The Scope of the Advocacy of Genocide
I have heard many WCG members speak favorably about the extermination of Native Americans. I have no idea what percentage of Armstrongists held this view. I heard it often enough to believe it was common. Moreover, this essay draws upon views circulating during the period of Classical Armstrongism. I have no idea what the various small denominations derived from the old WCG currently believe on this topic. In the Classical Armstrongism period, I never actually understood if proponents of genocide actually knew what they were saying. To be sure, they did not see a role for the WCG in such a campaign. They saw it as something that European settlers should have done. The WCG understood that the ministration of death had been vacated. But if someone believes in their heart that the ethics of the Old Testament requires and approves genocide and this is a guideline even yet for the modern people of “Israel”, is that not in some way horrifically corrupting? Does it not evoke hatred when Jesus said if you hate someone you have murdered them and this is not to be for Christians? I used to comfort myself by thinking that people in the WCG who blithely advocated genocide just did not understand what they were saying. But, in the last analysis, I do not know how far in the direction of “holy” violence some of these people would go. When Armstrongists delve into politics, it is surprising how extremist some will become.
Summary Argument
Native Americans are not genetically Canaanites. The people of Lebanon have genetic continuity with the ancient Canaanites and they are also, incidentally, very closely related to the Jews. God promised an evacuation of the Promised Land that would involve using hornets to chase the Canaanites out. But because Israel lacked trust in God, Israelites eventually were required to have a role in the blood-letting and the killing of men, women and children. Likely, the Canaanites were a contributive cause by stubbornly hanging onto the land. They actually had many overseas colonies and could have relocated over time. God did not want them to leave suddenly anyway. The decrees given by God to Israel governing the expulsion of the Canaanites should not be applied to Native Americans, Australian Aborigines, Maoris, South African Blacks or Laplanders (none of these people are Canaanites) in order to concoct a gratifying fit with British-Israelism. Moreover, anyone who is a Christian should focus on the problem of lack of trust on the part of the Israelites as the object lesson of the conquest of Canaan, rather than some latter-day, unloving, un-Christian and callous invocation of genocide.
It's very interesting to read the very first Church of God bulletins from the 1850's in the Dakota's and the Churches in the Territories. Herbert Armstrong isn't that the guy born a decade after Little Big Horn and 2 years after Wounded Knee? Nck
ReplyDeleteTo the PSEUDO FAKE huckleberry:
ReplyDeleteWhat, pray tell, is your problem?
You criticize what you think are the problems of those who were/are members of the WCG and the splinters, yet you admit in your post that you don’t really know what the truth is. Stop making things up based on your fallacious assumptions.
One thing you should understand that obviously you don’t understand is that there were two different worlds in the WCG. One is the headquarters world, where your assumptions were not presented as you present them. Then there was the local church world. The local churches were filled with people who came from many other teachings. And, many held onto some of their former beliefs and teachings. Those beliefs were not what headquarters in Pasadena taught!
However, some of those members came to headquarters for the college or trying for the ministry, deacons, etc. Thus, some of those former beliefs showed up, but were not topics of discussion as church teachings. Yet, when those folks went back to the local churches they carried with them their old beliefs that they had not given up. Those things are what you are grumping about, not official teachings of the church.
For example, you grump and boringly moan that the church may have taught and believed native Americans should have been exterminated. Absolute nonsense!
What was taught in my 7/8 years in Pasadena was simple and straightforward. Here it is, the first settlers of America BELIEVED THEY THEMSELVES had a divine mission to remove the native population. You, my friend, are in essence taking that teaching and twisting it totally out of shape and claiming the church MAY have taught the native Americans should be removed by any means. That is your creation and not reality.
When we left Pasadena my wife and I were amazed at how many things the members were doing that was not taught by the church or college. It was like a different world. Because we did not tell many people we were Ambassador graduates, they did not try to soften some of the things they talked about. But, after a few months I started wearing my college ring, boy did certain things disappear from the conversations.
So, Scriptor, Neo, pseudo Huckleberry, or whoever you are, please stop accusing others based on your fantasies. Hit us with the facts of real spiritual problems we all have, and want to overcome, with suggestions to help. I personally don’t believe you are capable of doing that, but can only grump, criticize, moan and gnash your teeth.
Maybe someday we should meet in Tombstone and compare real notes and problems.
My personal experience with leaders of the church, and I don’t mean saying hi, or hello were with, Herbert Armstrong, Ted Armstrong, Rod Meredith, Charles Dorothy, Al Portune, Dr. Hoeh, David Jon Hill, Dr. C. Paul Meredith, etc., etc. etc.
I spent almost 10 years at headquarters working with the above, and working with Ken Westby, Jerry Aust, Anthony Buzzard, Paul Zapf, John Wilson, Gene Hogburg, Walter Sharp, and dozens more.
And, if, based on your silly assumptions, you think HWA was a white supremacist, and racist, maybe you should read In His Image, a paper by another group, and see what you could really get grumpy about.
Pseudo Huckleberry you have a lot to learn to overcome your false assumptions. Please get started, and overcome this propaganda nonsense. Ike Clinton is more your identity.
Doc. Have you seen Wyatt? “He’s down at the stream walk-in’ on water.”
Curiously, HWA's second wife was purported to be Native American.
ReplyDeleteEven Germans in the church were kind of a "second class anglo" because they were labeled Assyrian. HWA himself openly declared (and I heard many times live) that his primary mission was to reach the "White English Speaking people of the world" and that the "gentiles" were a sort of secondary by product of his work.
Yes, there was often local scuttlebutt and ideas, often times even coming from the pastor himself. One sermon I heard declared that it was against the concept of submission to government that the Colonists rebelled against England. Another guy declared, that as a minister he had "more" of God's Holy Spirit than the laity. Let's not forget the fabled Gerald Waterhouse , who (I kid you not) I heard in a sermon , declare that back in the old Chicago days, that Joe Tkach Sr. hit 29 homers in the softball league, playing first base, and "and if that aint proof that Mr. Tkach is an apostle too, then I dont know what is".
NOTE TO ALL-- Take church scuttlebutt and wild theory always with a grain of salt.
I recall hearing HWA on the radio saying that he did not feel/think/believe (I forget the exact word he used) that the Indians had been treated fairly.
ReplyDeleteI also remember an old man in the UCG splinter group who thought that Indians were the descendants of the Philistines.
History is politics. The News is politics. Religion is politics.
ReplyDeletePolitics is lies.
Politics in the church is a major problem at the minute. But it will pass.
DeleteAnd, if, based on your silly assumptions, you think HWA was a white supremacist, and racist, maybe you should read In His Image, a paper by another group, and see what you could really get grumpy about.
ReplyDeletePeople are always playing the victim card and the race card. Always. Just to demonize the enemy. Facts are irrelevant in this day and age. Demonization is what it's all about.
I don't think that there was any comprehensive or systematic teaching on the treatment of Native Americans within the Worldwide Church of God. However, Armstrong's emphasis on British Israelism did lend itself to some bizarre notions among the leadership/membership about the doctrine and how it should be applied to our past and present. Hence, among folks who believed that WASP folks were the descendants of Manasseh and Ephraim of Israel, it is not surprising that some of them would adopt the view that indigenous peoples should have been exterminated (after all, they WERE the descendants of the folks who actually pursued those policies against indigenous populations). Let's face it, we know from the writings and policies left behind by those people that MANY of the early European colonists to this continent felt that they had a Divine mandate to displace the native inhabitants of these lands ("nits grow into lice").
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, this view that indigenous populations should be subjected to genocide is also to be expected of those with a Literalist-Fundamentalist view of Scripture. The mental and moral gymnastics which some folks go through to justify what the Israelites did to indigenous peoples in the Levant is astounding and horrifying. Talk about cognitive dissonance! For anyone to believe that Almighty God EVER ordered ANYONE to commit genocide (the indiscriminate killing of an entire people - men, women, and children) is incomprehensible. If God is the epitome of love, compassion, mercy, fairness and justice (and I believe "He" is), that would preclude God from EVER sanctioning the eradication of an entire people! Moreover, this doesn't even begin to take into account the damage which this would inflict on the psyche of the folks who would have to carry out such a horrific program (think about our own experiences with troops who have returned from our own wars).
Finally, Israel was NEVER promised North America, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa or ANY other piece of real estate which English-speaking peoples have occupied - NEVER (I defy anyone to find such a promise in Scripture - it DOESN'T exist)! Abraham and his descendants were promised a specific piece of real estate in the MIDDLE EAST - nowhere else! These folks need to reread the portions of Scripture which deal with those promises to Israel - particularly those related to the boundaries of the territory which was promised to them. Bottom line, there simply is NO way to justify what was done to indigenous peoples by English-speaking peoples by using Scripture or God!
You're infamous for having issues with this....
DeleteWell, I suppose that if you hold up wypipo in America as "modern day Israel", there has to be a modern day Canaan for them to go around massacring, right? Is this GODDDDS PRINCIPLE OF DUALITY at work? Did they drive out the inhabitants GODS WAY, and get North America BACK ON TRACK, even while not keeping GODS HOLY SABBATH?
ReplyDeleteTongue firmly in cheek here.
anonymous 2:52 wrote: "To the PSEUDO FAKE huckleberry"
ReplyDeleteThis is the most coherent idea contained in your comment so that is what I am going to respond to. You see, you have written a double negative. A pseudo fake means that it is real. So you are calling me a real huckleberry. I don't think you intended this illogic but then most of what you write may be unintentional illogic. Your minister must be proud of your defense of the faith. You're no daisy, but if you can come up with something that is more than the froth of vitriol, then
I'm you're huckleberry
Dear fake huckleberry, I always leave something in my posts that leaves the door open for folks like you to criticize since you can’t answer the main points. Atheists, etc. love to find spelling errors and such so they can belittle the person they can’t answer.
ReplyDeleteI thot you would catch Ike Clinton sooner, but nope, you didn’t.
It’s Clanton.
Anyway, my pseudo, fake, Huckleberry you can’t and didn’t answer my post. Please stop with the biased assumptions, you would make a bette impact with real and honest facts.
Pseudo, fake, huckleberry you are being silly. And as usual you assume too much that is not true. I HAVE NO MINISTER, silly. Nor am I a member of any WCG groups. Please learn to respond with real facts.
ReplyDelete4.55 pm
ReplyDeleteSatan's highest priority isn't killing people but rather twisting their minds in order to make it more difficult for them to qualify for eternal life.
Which is why God killed off the old world with the flood, and why He ordered ancient Israel to kill off the inhabitants of the promised land. It's also why God will allow billions to shortly die in WW3. It's an act of love.
4:55 writes:
ReplyDelete“Finally, Israel was NEVER promised North America, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa or ANY other piece of real estate which English-speaking peoples have occupied - NEVER (I defy anyone to find such a promise in Scripture - it DOESN'T exist)!”
The closest would be:
Ps 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance [nahalah], and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession ['ahuzzah].
"The nations are to become the king's "inheritance" (nahalah)...
“The Hebrew behind the phrase “your possession” (’ahuzzatka) is derived from the verb ’by “lay hold of, seize, hold fast” (Holladay, CHALOT, 8). Although it has assumed the meaning “property,” the origins, of the word still reflect a context of taking by force that is consistent with the kind of conquest of territory associated with expanding kingdoms...
Ge 17:8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee ... all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession ['ahuzzah];
Dt 4:21b that good land, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance [nahalah]:
“Most often this word [nahalah] describes the tribal allotments of the Promised Land or the whole land as the inheritance of the combined nation. Here, however, the vision of the Davidic monarchs expands to include as their divinely given inheritance the "ends of the earth"..." (Gerald H. Wilson, Psalms Volume 1, NIVAC, p.112).
Ps 72:8 He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.
"The idea of world domination expressed in 2:8 is not derived directly from 2 Samuel 7, which focuses primarily on an enduring, just rule over God's people of Israel and Judah. The submission of the kings of the earth to the Davidic monarch also appears in Psalm 72:8-11 - another royal psalm that reflects the official ideology of the Jerusalem monarchy... the "official line" of these Davidic kings was their right to rule all the earth by Yahweh's authorization and support..." (Gerald H. Wilson, Psalms Volume 1, NIVAC, pp.111-12).
"With the demise of the monarchy in the Babylonian Exile the situation changed. Since there was no longer a presiding king, these psalms with their exalted view of anointed human leadership became the source of hope for future restoration of Yahweh's purpose of Israel and Judah. The "Anointed One" - Messiah - was the rightful descendant of David, who would in God's own timing restore the monarchy, defeat the nations and accomplish worldwide dominion envisioned in Psalm 2 and 72" (Gerald H. Wilson, Psalms Volume 1, NIVAC, p.114).
Thursday, June 8, 2023 @ 10:26 PM PDT,
ReplyDeleteSad - so sad. I pray that God will open your mind someday. It is Satan who inspires murder - "He" was a murderer from the beginning - just as "he" is the father of lies!
8:59
ReplyDeleteOnce again, you are struggling in public against your own illogic. In what sense is a pseudonym fake? Do you mean I am not a real huckleberry? Does anyone believe, besides you, that somehow an actual huckleberry wrote this article? This illogic is laced through everything you write. In fact, something that I wrote really put a burr under your saddle. And you can't defend against it. My guess is that I have attacked some of your cherished beliefs, whether Armstrongists or self-concocted, and you have no viable counter-arguments. So instead of a courteous debate you must resort to simple rancor.
Huckleberry
This is the issue that is most concerning.
ReplyDeleteYou have someone who is so indoctrinated with oddball theology and pseudo-history that someone can suggest to them that a race of people should be totally exterminated and to them it sounds right - in fact, it sounds like the god-fearing, patriotic thing to do. This is the motivation that energized Kristallnacht in Germany back in 1938. For most of us, the advocacy of genocide belongs to the world of evil. But for some, it is a token of their full and righteous committment to Armstrongist belief.
My belief is that there are many people within the Armstrongist fold who either now believe in genocide or at one time did believe in genocide. What if an investigative reporter were to ask an Armstrongist splinter leader about what he believed concerning Native Americans or American Blacks in light of the OT? What if the leader had to go on record? What would he say?
You see, Armstrongists believe that the Law of Moses is written on their hearts. This includes legislation pertaining to the extermination of the Canaanites. They understand that the ministration of death has been vacated but that does not revoke the moral content of these laws. Wishing for the desctruction for entire groups of people is not renounced, just the bloodshed piece. And this is what existed in Armstrongism during its Golden Age back in the Seventies. People who would stand up in Spokesman Club, chest puffed out, and declare how their brave, patriotic ancestors accomplished great things including the killing of American Indians (I witnessed such a declaration). And the Director of the club and the members did not bat an eye. But on the other hand they did not form a militia and go out and shoot American Indians. They had the intent and desire but not the will to action. The ministration of death was gone but the moral thrust was still in place.
This is a problem. These people were fearful ot the wrath of the "Assyrians" and looked upon them as an agency of consummate evil and yet they themselves harbored similar thoughts. How then were they not the agency of that same consummate evil - an evil wearing a thick varnish of abrogated Mosaic Law. And the moral nature did not exist in them to see the issue at all.
Huckleberrah
4.04 am
ReplyDeleteOpen my mind? I don't need anyone, including God Himself to open my mind. That's because I know what I know from personal experience. I've spent a life time struggling to reverse the toxic brainwashing of HWAs church. I've basically succeeded because I'm naturally strong, but most people aren't. So I shudder at the thought of the people around me trying to succeed when they are finally called.
Btw, the garbage being forced down todays elementary school kids throats is worse than HWAs cool aid.
Erratum 7:13
ReplyDeleteA couple of times this comment I mention "moral" content of the Law. What I wrote was that the ministration of death was vacated but no the moral thrust of the law for Armstrongists.
That is a mistaken. The extermination of the Canaanites and the ministration of death both fall under the letter of the law and are not a part of its moral content. The moral content would abstract away from the letter and oppose evil as a force against God.
One part of the letter, the ministration of death, has been vacated but not the full package. That is what I meant to say and mislabelled the residual letter of the law as "moral."
Huckleberrah
Doc: “That’s funny…”
ReplyDeleteOnce again, you are struggling in public against your own illogic. In what sense is a pseudonym fake? (The FAKE huckleberry tries to divert our attention.)
Do you mean I am not a real huckleberry? (Wow, you got it. You don’t qualify to be the huckleberry that is in Tombstone. That was Doc Holiday challenging the bad cowboy Ringo. You qualify more for the Ike Clanton bad cowboy. That’s why you are pseudo.)
Does anyone believe, besides you, that somehow an actual huckleberry wrote this article? (Where did you come up with that illogic thot?)
This illogic is laced through everything you write. (No, it’s your typical habit of coming to wrong conclusions, and claiming that is the correct understanding. It is not.)
In fact, something that I wrote really put a burr under your saddle. (Nope, it’s your every mistaken assumptions that should irritate everyone.)
And you can't defend against it. My guess is that I have attacked some of your cherished beliefs, whether Armstrongists or self-concocted, and you have no viable counter-arguments. So instead of a courteous debate you must resort to simple rancor. (Nice, but failed excuse for running down a whole group of people trying to follow and serve their Creator. So far it is you doing what you just wrote. Try looking in the mirror sometime.)
(Bible believer: The Bible says the Creator has a nose.
Pseudo Huckleberry: No, that is not what it means, it is an anthropomorphic depiction of a spiritual concept….etc., etc, ad infinitum.
Yahshua’s response to Pseudo: If you have no belief when my words are about the things of earth, how will you have belief if my words are about the things of heaven?
-John 3: 12)
Huckleberry
Friday, June 9, 2023 at 6:35:00 AM PDT
To 7:13
ReplyDeleteQuit assuming something and posting it as fact. Please give us a live presentation of your fake ability to read minds. How can you in all good conscience claim to know what people are thinking, and then in reality post what you are thinking in order to belittle them?
Ike, you have a problem, big time.
8:07 wrote, "Quit assuming something and posting it as fact."
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly do you object to? This is the problem with many of the comments here. They are rants full of assertions with no support.
Maybe you don't like my statement below:
"You see, Armstrongists believe that the Law of Moses is written on their hearts."
Do you think this is false? Am I just pretending to mind-read? See how I had to pick out an issue? And you did not? You just ranted for the sake of ranting. Why should anyone pay attention to you?
Huckleberrah
To 9:17 huckleburden:
ReplyDeleteSo, you read their minds and know this as a fact? “ This is a problem. These people were fearful ot the wrath of the "Assyrians" and looked upon them as an agency of consummate evil and yet they themselves harbored similar thoughts.”
And this: “ My belief is that there are many people within the Armstrongist fold who either now believe in genocide or at one time did believe in genocide.” And, you know this is a fact, how?
Or, how about this? “ You have someone who is so indoctrinated with oddball theology and pseudo-history that someone can suggest to them that a race of people should be totally exterminated and to them it sounds right—-“ You know this, how? And what makes you the arbiter of what is oddball theology, and ‘oops’ PSEUDO-history?
There you have it, a small selection of many from all your posts, of assuming something from your false perspective and presenting it as fact. Those are not facts, they are simply biased assumptions from someone who doesn’t mind trying to destroy the faith of a whole group of people. Maybe millstones are cheap these days for woke biased minds who thrive on speculation and assumptions. Ya’ think?
Feel better now? Hope so. We aim to please. If necessary I will look for some more of your biased assumptions presented as fact, but frankly that would be a waste of my time, since you already know what they are anyway. So, you only go back to the seventies when the infiltration to destroy the WCG was at its peak? Nice, the blind leading the blind.
You can become a source of good instead with very little effort. Why not try it, I guarantee you will like it.
Miller Jones is against murder but he is on the side of the orthodox churches who were always killing each other. Orthodoxy is an exercise in squaring the circle.
ReplyDeleteSuggest a reading of https://www.amazon.com/Lost-World-Israelite-Conquest-Retribution/dp/0830851844 to find a better way to understand the Israelite conquest.
ReplyDelete"Miller Jones is against murder but he is on the side of the orthodox churches who were always killing each other. Orthodoxy is an exercise in squaring the circle. "
ReplyDeleteThat statement proves that you have no idea what you are talking about. You are so hung up on the word orthodox and unable in your mind to understand what it means. Orthodox beliefs and Orthodox churches can and usually are two different things, though they can be the same in a few cases. Clean your mind of the Armstrogite myths and lies and engage your brain, for once.
Anonymous 10:33
ReplyDeleteApparently you are not and Armstrongist or you are new to Armstrongism and are unfamiliar with its history. (Or you are being annoyingly disingenuous.) If you do not have a background in these ideas, you can research them. There are online archives of Armstrongist literature. I am not going to run down a rabbit trail to research these idea for you.
You wrote, “So, you read their minds and know this as a fact? “ This is a problem. These people were fearful of the wrath of the "Assyrians" and looked upon them as an agency of consummate evil and yet they themselves harbored similar thoughts.”
All Armstrongists know and understand that Germans are Assyrians and the Assyrians would be used as the tool in God’s hand to punish the Israelites. Gerald Waterhouse spent hours taking us through the lurid acts of destruction that the Germans would perpetrate against the modern-day descendants of Israel. This will be done through the agency of the Dark Side because "God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all" (1 John 1:5).
You wrote, “And this: “My belief is that there are many people within the Armstrongist fold who either now believe in genocide or at one time did believe in genocide.” And, you know this is a fact, how?”
First, you will notice that this is “my belief.” It is not an assertion based on a survey I have taken or other data I have collected formally. It is based on hearing sermons and viewpoints. What I am referring to is that Armstrongists believe that the Law of Moses is written on the heart of Christians. The Law of Moses includes the decrees concerning the extermination of the Canaanites. It is my belief, again, that Armstrongists have an un-nuanced view of the genocide language in the OT. This is what my essay is about. That God did not originally decree genocide but this was something that was a punishment on Israel. If you think that Armstrongists understand this already, ask a few and come back and report to us. It is more likely that you will find Armstrongists who have never even thought about the issue but nevertheless support the idea that the Law of Moses is written on the heart.
You wrote, “Or, how about this? “ You have someone who is so indoctrinated with oddball theology and pseudo-history that someone can suggest to them that a race of people should be totally exterminated and to them it sounds right—-“ You know this, how? And what makes you the arbiter of what is oddball theology, and ‘oops’ PSEUDO-history?”
Armstrongism asserts salvation by works through a doctrine called Qualification. This is odd-ball. Armstrongism advocates a fantasy called British Israelism. The pseudo-history is contained principally in the two volumes of the Compendium of World History and an assortment of published articles by Herman Hoeh and others.
I feel like I have let you bait me with your disingenuousness. I am not going to let you take up my time when you come back and ask me to prove that the Compendium is pseudo-history, for instance. You are now on your own. You should be capable of doing some research for yourself.
Huckleberrah
Calling the Compendium "pseudo history" is too generous. It's more like "really sloppy speculation".
DeleteSorry huckleburden, you are wrong again. You really need to speak to facts, not assumptions.
ReplyDeleteYou wrote:
“ Armstrongism asserts salvation by works through a doctrine called Qualification. This is odd-ball. Armstrongism advocates a fantasy called British Israelism. The pseudo-history is contained principally in the two volumes of the Compendium of World History and an assortment of published articles by Herman Hoeh and others”
Salvation was not taught it was by works. Works had to do with one’s rewards, not salvation. Nor was it a doctrine called Qualification during my years in Pasadena.
Another post of yours that shows you know very little about the history behind these questions. And, what was really taught.
You are in no position to label it odd-ball, since as far as we know you are not a recognized authority in or outside the WCG.
Further, the BI teaching has long been in question, and you are a Johnny come lately to the subject. Dr. Martin was one of the first to present a substantial rebuttal to it. Plus, HWA did not come up with the doctrine. He found sources which taught it and at the time it appeared sound.
I also knew Dr. Martin very well. Did you?
My problem with your presentations is you are talking about things I lived through and people I knew personally. I already listed many of them. Guess you didn’t read that either. You mentioned “in the seventies “ you witnessed something. Well, Ike, I began in the fifties. That’s obviously a couple “days” before you came on the scene.
Be glad anytime to privately or publicly compare my experiences with yours and show how late you are to the rumble at the OK corral.
Biased assumption after the fact is not fact. Just assumption.
Since you seem to be looking for an out from your embarrassing position, just reply with “the pressure was too much to bear” and I will help with the situation.
Dr. Hoeh, himself finally renounced the history. I just happened to be there during the time he was writing it. Often, he would come into class and tell us what he had found, and the next class tell us he had to change that which he told us the previous class.
I began studying the lit from the Radio Church of God in 1955, which led to me going to AC in Pasadena. Graduated in 1963. So, how about a couple of your bona fides.
By the way, Gary and others here, thanks for your patience with my friend’s and my posts. Will be glad to drop the issue if you wish, otherwise I will not stop pointing out that biased assumptions are not fact. And, that living through something is much better than secondhand assumptions.
Follower of the Way
Proverbs 28:1
Anybody who believes that fellow humans ought to be exterminated based on their race or ethnicity, and would actually look forward to and relish this, ought to be exterminated themselves.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Friday, June 9, 2023 at 3:41:00 AM PDT,
ReplyDeleteIf your comments were meant to suggest that Jesus Christ will one day rule over both Israel and Gentile kingdoms, then we are in agreement. Scripture predicts that God's Kingdom will one day encompass ALL of earth's real estate. To be clear, however, that is NOT the same thing as saying that Israel was to eventually inherit the entire earth. Once again, Abraham and his descendants were promised a specific piece of real estate in the Middle East (much bigger than the territory originally occupied by Saul's, David's, or Solomon's kingdoms). Scripture reveals that Israel was originally intended to introduce YHWH to the rest of the world (Gentiles), and Abraham was promised that the entire earth would someday be blessed because of his offspring (Jesus of Nazareth).
DR. Hoeh wrote in The Race Question that American Indians were of Tiras, one son of Japheth. No mention?
ReplyDeleteInteresting point: the Indians had a way of killing someone by tying each leg to a different tree, bent over, and then released tearing the man apart.
Possible Ukraine connection. TARAS is a common Ukrainian name. When the Norsemen started Kyiv in the first millenium, they gradually conquered the neighbouring tribes. The ones in the southern plains were Polovtsi, who were Medes-Ukrainians. To the north in the forests were another tribe which captured one of the kings and killed him using that tree method.
"Interesting point: the Indians had a way of killing someone by tying each leg to a different tree, bent over, and then released tearing the man apart."
DeleteThat method of execution is also known from the Greco-Roman period. Alexander the Great ordered someone be killed that way.
6:18 wrote, "Salvation was not taught it was by works."
ReplyDeleteRight. And you believed them. Now you are in the condition that you are in. Close to death and you still believe a bunch of cult malarkey. Try to help yourself. Please read this:
https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2023/01/bootstrapping-salvation-disturbing.html
Huckleberrah
Part 1
ReplyDelete7:53 writes:
“If your comments were meant to suggest that Jesus Christ will one day rule over both Israel and Gentile kingdoms, then we are in agreement.”
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.
While we can agree in principle, we may disagree on how.
Jer 23:4a And I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed [“poimaino,” LXX] them:
John 21:16b He saith unto him, Feed [poimaino] my sheep.
After Christ completes the second half of his prophetic week he will set up Davidic kings to act as His shepherds/vice-regents in his absence when He returns to heaven, just as he appointed Peter to shepherd His flock before his returned to heaven at the end of His first half week.
(The Seventy Weeks graphic: https://members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/375ecc60.png)
Isa 14:2 And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors.
"... according to the prophet's meaning, to be ruled by the people of God is the true happiness of the nations, and to allow themselves to be so ruled is their true liberty" (F. Delitizsch, Isaiah, KD, Vol.7, p.199).
Ge 15:18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
"According to the oratorical character of the promise, the two large rivers, the Nile and the Euphrates, are mentioned as the boundaries WITHIN which the seed of Abram would possess the promised land,
Ge 15:19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
Ge 15:20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
Ge 15:21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
"the exact limits of which are more minutely described in the list of the tribes who were then in possession. Ten tribes are mentioned between the southern border of the land and the extreme north, "to convey the impression of universality without exception, of unqualified completeness, the symbol of which is the number ten" (Delitzsch)"..." (C. F. Keil, Genesis, KD).
Part 2
ReplyDeleteEze 47:13 Thus saith the Lord GOD; This shall be the border, whereby ye shall inherit the land according to the twelve tribes of Israel: Joseph shall have two portions.
"If Ezekiel considered himself somewhat in the role of a new Moses in the restoration of Israel's sacrificial worship at the altar (43:13-27), there is an even clearer echo of Moses in relation to the land. Just as Moses had described the boundaries of the land and allocated it in advance to the tribes of Israel before the conquest, so Ezekiel now gives the boundaries of the land again and provides detailed tribal allocations in advance of the return from exile" (Christopher J. H. Wright, The Message of Ezekiel, BST, p.359)
"In short, while the territory enclosed by the borders in Ezekiel 47 is roughly equivalent to the territory Numbers 34 describes, the texts mark off the borders by striking different means. Many of the shared features - the Jordan the Wadi of Egypt, the Great Sea - are obvious geographical markers..." (Steven Tuell, Ezekiel, p.336).
1 Kgs 8:65 So Solomon held the feast at that time, and all Israel with him, a great assembly from the entrance of Hamath to the brook of Egypt... (NAB)
"The whole area of the land deserves to be compared with the boundaries given in Numbers 34:1-12, and with the extent of Solomon's kingdom in 1 Kings 8:65" (John B. Taylor, Ezekiel, TOTC, p.273).
"Strikingly, the land's borders delineated in 47:13-23 do not represent the area that Israel traditionally occupied. Historically Israel's geopolitical reach included extensive parts of Transjordan... It excluded Philistia, Phoenicia, and the land of Syria. [or part of the land of Syria; depending on the definition of Lebo-Hamath]. Ezekiel 47, the reader concludes, is simply not interested in the land historic occupation; rather the text is following the priestly delineation of borders in Num 34:1-12" (Stephen L. cook, Ezekiel 38-48, AB, p.279).
"Remarkably, like Num 34:10-12, Ezekiel's definition of the land of Israel excludes the Transjordanian regions previously occupied by the tribes of Gad, Reuben, and one-half of Manasseh. At the time of the conquest Yahweh had conceded this land to the tribes, but it was never recognized as integral to the promised land. For Ezekiel, as for Moses, "the holy land" stops at the Jordan River; beyond this the land is unclean" (Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel Chapters 25-48, NICOT, p.716).
In the Messianic kingdom, the social status of Levi, Judah, Benjamin, Reuben and Simeon will be ‘higher’ than Ephraim and Manasseh.
"What is most significant is that Duguid has used vertical language to describe the social change while the book uses horizontal language. It is not a matter of being up or down a social ladder as it is a matter of being near or far from sacred space. It is a subtle point, but it is significant to grasping the worldview of the book. In our time, we tend to use vertical metaphors to expose social status. In the worldview of Ezekiel, the metaphorical language is horizontal, based on the degree of access to sacred space" (Kalinda Rose Stevenson, The Vision of Transformation - The Territorial Rhetoric of Ezekiel 40-48, pp. xxiii-iv).
In https://members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/25cdbd60.png 1,2,3 equals birth order and a,b equals grandchildren.
Part 1
ReplyDelete7:53 writes:
“If your comments were meant to suggest that Jesus Christ will one day rule over both Israel and Gentile kingdoms, then we are in agreement.”
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.
While we can agree in principle, we may disagree on how.
Jer 23:4a And I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed [“poimaino,” LXX] them:
John 21:16b He saith unto him, Feed [poimaino] my sheep.
After Christ completes the second half of his prophetic week he will set up Davidic kings to act as His shepherds/vice-regents in his absence when He returns to heaven, just as he appointed Peter to shepherd His flock before his returned to heaven at the end of His first half week.
(The Seventy Weeks graphic: https://members.optusnet.com.au/futurewatch/375ecc60.png)
Isa 14:2 And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors.
"... according to the prophet's meaning, to be ruled by the people of God is the true happiness of the nations, and to allow themselves to be so ruled is their true liberty" (F. Delitizsch, Isaiah, KD, Vol.7, p.199).
Ge 15:18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
"According to the oratorical character of the promise, the two large rivers, the Nile and the Euphrates, are mentioned as the boundaries WITHIN which the seed of Abram would possess the promised land,
Ge 15:19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
Ge 15:20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
Ge 15:21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
"the exact limits of which are more minutely described in the list of the tribes who were then in possession. Ten tribes are mentioned between the southern border of the land and the extreme north, "to convey the impression of universality without exception, of unqualified completeness, the symbol of which is the number ten" (Delitzsch)"..." (C. F. Keil, Genesis, KD).
To 8:58
ReplyDeleteThanks for the reply huckleburden. Once again you are assuming what you don’t know and posting it as fact.
The condition I am in is excellent. And, you have no idea what I believe. But, I do know you are incorrect in most of what you write.
All the best to you, Ike,
Follower of the Way
8:43
ReplyDeleteNative Americans are not descended from Tiras as Hoeh claimed. Nor are they descended from Canaan. The people in what the KJV glosses as the Table of Nations are not the ancestors of all mankind. If that were true, everyone in the world would be of the same haplogroup. The Bible does not call this genealogy The Table of Nations but calls it “the clans of the sons of Noah”. (There of course is other background to this but it is too lengthy to recount here.) This was a family of Middle Eastern people who were racially and genetically the same. Based on what we know of the genetics of ancient Jews and Canaanites, they were haplogroup J.
Native Americans are almost uniformly Haplogroup Q. There is some small presence of other haplogroups including haplogroup R. Haplogroup J is just nor present among them (to the dismay of Mormons). Native Americans can be traced via genome to ancient North Eurasian people who intermarried with ancient East Asian people before they migrated to the Americas. Essentially, Native Americans are about 30 percent European and 70 percent Asian.
Here is the grand principle, wait for it: Our genomes are a map of human genetic relationships and migrations. The putative Table of Nations in Genesis 10 in the Bible, if it is supposed to be the genealogy of all mankind, does not match our genomes. Herman Hoeh, by assuming the interpretation that the Table of Nations forms the racial history of mankind, assured that his conclusions about race would come out of fantasyland.
The physical anthropology of Native Americans is clearly Asian. Whereas, Canaanites, as his theory went, were Blacks. I wrote to Hoeh about this back in the Seventies, the Golden Age of Armstrongism. His response was that the Patriarch Canaan had married one of the daughters of Tiras and this gave rise to the Native Americans. Nowhere in his previous writing did he ever broach this idea. I believe this was just an artful dodge. He knew that the physical anthropology of Native Americans did not match his racial theory. So, I forced the issue by asking him if Native Americans and Blacks could intermarry. After all, his theory was that both races were descended from Canaan. He balked. He said it was generally not to be recommended. So, he actually believed that they were two different races even though his theory said otherwise.
You use of a shared form of torture to establish a racial connection is typical of the way Hoeh interpreted history. He used coincidence in names and practices to associate people racially. The name Phoenicia has a complex origin but in some ancient writing it is similar to the word for “crimson.” Historians believed at one time in the past (it has now been found to have a more complex origin) that this came from the trade that the Phoenicians conducted in a reddish dye extracted from murex snails, sometimes called Tyrian Purple. In a breath-taking leap worthy of John Forbes Nash, Hoeh decided that it referred to the red skin color of the Phoenicians and associated this with the redskins of the New World. Only I have been around Native Americans all my life and none of them have red skin. They are all uniformly brown unless they have been too long in the sun. You cannot base history on something like a common torture being used by two different peoples. Making such associations is inane and at the same time one of the chief methodologies used by Hoeh to develop his world and racial histories.
Huckleberrah
5:58
ReplyDeleteI think what you have written speaks for itself.
Huckleberrah
Anonymous 5:58 Follower of the Way
ReplyDeleteOther than taking cheap shots you have not said very much. What do you believe about American Indians? Let's see what way you follow.
Now it's Dichter?
ReplyDeleteCould the 30% of the natives be from Tiras?
I've learned a world of stuff, it's worthwhile sharing.
The Chinese and blacks were separate creations from before Adam. I won't say much more here. There is a gap of a few thousand years in Europe's history prior to that, where the previous race was extincted.
As to haplogroup J in Palestine's history, Israel only lived there a small part of the time, so J refers to other indigenous people. Whatever the heck Canaanites are.
Trying to differentiate Esau Arabs from Ham in the Middle East. There are two factions of Muslim there. Could that be the differentiation?
8:47
ReplyDelete"Could the 30% of the natives be from Tiras?"
No. Tiras would have been haplogroup J. The North Eurasian ancestry of Native Americans is haplogroup R.
"The Chinese and blacks were separate creations from before Adam."
That is an unusual conjecture. It fits neigher Hoeh's legendarium nor is this reflected in the human genome. Asians are descended from haplogroup A just like all of the rest of us.
"As to haplogroup J in Palestine's history, Israel only lived there a small part of the time, so J refers to other indigenous people. Whatever the heck Canaanites are."
Jews are haplogroup J. Ancient Canaanites were haplogroup J. Modern Western Europeans are haplogroup R for the most part. There is no evidence from ancient DNA studies that the haplogroup R people ever lived in great numbers (or even small numbers) in Palestine. Wesern Europeans are Gentiles. The fact that Canaanites are haplogroup J indicates that Ham was also haplogroup J (if we are to intrepret the Genesis Table of Nations as a collection of related clans of commmon descent). Shem, Ham and Japheth were not progenitors of different peoples.
Arabs are all haplogroup J except where some admixture with Africans has occurred. The Bible tradition is that the Arabs came from Ishmael. Some have the tradition of being descended from Eber.
Huckleberrah
"That is an unusual conjecture. It fits neigher Hoeh's legendarium nor is this reflected in the human genome. Asians are descended from haplogroup A just like all of the rest of us."
DeleteYou never heard the "mud people" line?
@ 9:53:
ReplyDeleteCan the branches from Noah have different haplogroups? Why not?
What are the S-E Asians like Thais, who are of Gomer <Japheth.
Shem obviously is R - R1a. Eastern Europe is R1b.
Jews are hard to talk about because how you gonna find the true descendants of Judah/Levi? You find them in the royal families and some of the "secret" Mediterranean groups. Then you find that Jews in general are opposing the royals.
Ashkenazi is from Ashkenaz <Japheth. Middle Eastern Jews were converted from Arabs all these centuries. Khazarian Jews are whatever. It is found that over 95% of Israeli Jews today do not have Abraham's gene. You have a major party in Israel that is Arabic Jews, who have "gotten along" with neighbouring Arabs. What kind of personality does a true Jew have?
Someone said that Sephardic Jews are of Arabs. I haven't confirmed that.
Armstrongites don't do a very good job of impeaching the dna evidence which has resulted from the mapping of the human genome. They generally treat it in the same ways in which they have handled any other valid research which counters their beliefs. They raise sophomoric questions, which are answered, wait a while, and ask the same questions again and again, hoping that the person who answered the questions isn't around this time.
ReplyDeleteBI is dead! Debunked! Caput. Deal with that, COGlodytes! You've wasted your lives, fearing a future which isn't going to happen. Bad things and good things have occurred throughout history, so chances are we will experience some bad. It's just that you don't know what the bad will be, and will be totally unprepared when it does not conform to HWA's marketing fantasies!
The mud people! Didn't the racists have a theory about their mud people coming from indigenous people, and Neanderthal? Did they actually classify Asians as being mud people? Being of Cauc-Asian descent, I've always considered Asians to be my cousins! I never did care what GG Rupert said about them!
ReplyDeleteGenerally speaking, as our "friend" above did, they claim nonwhites were created pre-Adam and therefore lack "something" the white "Aryan" Adam descendants have. What that "something" is varies on the teller. Variants of this story are often popular among adherents of the Christian Identity movement, the Klan, the World Church of the Creator, etc. One recurring version has a group of Adam's early descendants running off to have sex with animals and somehow managing to create human /animal hybrids in the process, which became the Jews.
DeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 5:58 Follower of the Way
Other than taking cheap shots you have not said very much. What do you believe about American Indians? Let's see what way you follow.
Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 7:35:00 AM PDT
===============
Thanks 7:35 for the cheap shot. I challenge one person who demeans a whole group of good people on assumptions, but I am the bad guy, right? Thanks for the great laugh!!
As far as what I think of American Indians? Well, first off they are not from India.
Secondly, one of my best friends was a man who was one of the three “supreme court” judges for the Hopi. He also authored the Hopi language dictionary. My daughter used to house sit for he and his wife.
He died a few years ago. He was a fantastic human being. And, his wife drives a long way to visit us. She is also a wonderful person.
As far as your attempt to get me to espouse the former BI teaching, that would be silly. I researched it long before you Johnny come lately folks came along. What took you so long, and why do you folks seem to always weaponize doctrines that were under investigation before you came along, and use them to demean the great people who had to work through them? I don’t have to run down those who thought BI was totally correct then. Nor do I have to demean them by hitting them with angry biased false assumptions.
Hope that helps you.
As far as “huckleburden” goes, he’s probably a very nice person in person, but his false assumptive remarks are way off base from reality.
Today is a good day to repent, change and grow into eternal life. Everybody should do that, a guaranteed positive mindset will arise in spite of our human nature.
Follower of the Way.
anonymous 4:04
ReplyDeleteFunny that you would take offense at deameaning a whole group of good people. As I remember the followers of HWA were always talking about Christians being pagans and Gentiles having hearts of stone and Germans being war mongers.
Maybe you should look at your own hitory.
RSK 1:12
ReplyDeleteThe original modern human beings were haplogroup A. They are sub-Saharan Blacks. The entire modern human race is all descended from them. This is known as "Out of Africa" I and II. Whypepo originated from Blacks via mutation. This is verified by genetics.
Huckleberrah
Anonymous 4:04
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be beating around the bush. Maybe we should get more to the point:
1. Do you believe that American Indians are Canaanites?
2. Do you believe that they should have been wiped out by the Israelites who settled North America?
11:05
ReplyDelete"Can the branches from Noah have different haplogroups? Why not?"
No, Noah's descendants cannot have different y chromosome haplogroups in the natural. Y chromosome haplogroups do not work that way. If you are haplogroup R1b and have a kid who is haplogroup J2, you are not the kid's father. What genealogists call a non-parental event occurred. That means someone else got to your wife. Same holds true for Noah's descendants. Y chromosome haplogroups follow the masculine line.
It is also the case that we know that God did not miraculously change the haplogroups of Noah's descendants. If you map the various haplogroups of races in the world to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10, you will not get the same organization that is found in our genomes. You have to do some reading in genetics to understand this but take my word for it, its true. Noah is not the progenitor of the races of man. He is the progenitor of a small collection of Near Eastern clans, all with the same haplogroup.
What are the S-E Asians like Thais, who are kof Gomer <Japheth.
You can actually look this up in Wikipedia. I did not spend much time on it but I think they are haplogroup O and some others. They don't seem to be one thing. Gomer was a haplogroup J descendant of Noah. He was a Near Easterner and he looked like other Near Easterners.
Shem obviously is R - R1a. Eastern Europe is R1b.
Shem is not obviously haplogroup R. That is a fabrication of people who want to make the British people to be Semitic. They aren't. They originated as a pastoral people on the steppes of Russia. Eastern Europe is not R1b. The R1b people live in western Europe on the Atlantic littoral. She was haplogroup J just like his Jewish descendants. If Shem was haplogropu R than Jesus was born into the wrong group of people.
You have obviously come into contact with some literature that is trying to reconcile genetics with British Israelism. It will not work. It is just nonsense.
Huckleberrah
7:31 your questions are answered. Learn to read between the lines.
ReplyDeleteOh, Doc Martin mentioned that Biblically speaking, in reference to
Prophecy, peoples were classified by borders, not always our “scientific“ methods.
Also, New Testament mentions non-Israelites can be grafted into Israel. All these dots, and more need to be considered, not just one. So, why are they not considered on a site that professes to know more than Bible believers about all the Bible teaches?
Ergo, nations that begin to teach, believe, and follow the Bible are grafted in as Israelites. So, what does that mean when considering all that on a site whose purpose seems to be to destroy a certain group of people? Where does dna, etc., fit into that teaching.
There is so much not considered in the curriculum of this site. What happened to fairness and hearing both sides of an issue? That is lost here, partially because too many only consider the side that seems to favor their personal bias.
The goal should be to find TRUTH, not to defeat the opponent and win, truth or not.
Follower of the Way.
Spiritual growth includes love, kindness, care for one’s opponents, patience, etc. Where are those qualities here?
RSK 1:12 Addendum
ReplyDeleteYou see how explosive this is to Armstrongism. If the first man was Black, a sub-Saharan African, then Armstrongism has a little prooftext that says that God has a body and God and Jesus and Adam were all physically identical. This would mean, using the Armstrongist prooftext, that God is actually is the Black race rather than the White race as Armstrongist believe.
If Armstrongist could understand where their "God has a body" ideas take them, guys like "Follower of the Sway" would have to be hospitalized.
Huckelberrah
Hucklebuck:
ReplyDeleteI reversed R1a and R1b by mistake in my comment.
Further answer is optional, but you think you can fit all that genealogy into a small group in Middle East?
Of interest, Caucasians before the flood who lived 800 years would have 12 chromosomes instead of 8 and be ~10 feet tall. That change could have changed haplogroups and all that.
Wonder what Pakistanis are.
Do you say that Germans (southern) are R1b too? But written history clearly shows they migrated as the Assyrians.
You all sound like you accept that the Flood was not universal. That allows that Cain's descendants are around doing no good. Someone theorized that they are the 13 "bloodline" families. Or are those families Chaldeans, or Jews?
I am new to this genetics. I'm in my second year.
9:10 "your questions are answered. Learn to read between the lines."
ReplyDeleteMany bigots will say some of my best friends are Black. I asked you two questions that require and explicit answer. I don't need to read between the lines because I am asking you specific questions. Again:
1. Do you believe that American Indians are Canaanites?
2. Do you believe that they should have been wiped out by the Israelites who settled North America?
9:58 Some responses:
ReplyDelete"Further answer is optional, but you think you can fit all that genealogy into a small group in Middle East?"
Yes. It is not a stretch. Think of some of the families you know. Families can expand quickly.
"Of interest, Caucasians before the flood who lived 800 years would have 12 chromosomes instead of 8 and be ~10 feet tall. That change could have changed haplogroups and all that."
That is bizarre. Somebody is messing with you. You will not find anyone who knows anything about science supporting such a thing. People will go to extrordinary lenghts to make HWA and Armstrongism appear to be credible.
"Do you say that Germans (southern) are R1b too? But written history clearly shows they migrated as the Assyrians."
History "clearly shows" no such thing. That is fable. Germany contains people who are R1b and R1a. Ancient Assyrians are haplogroup J.
"You all sound like you accept that the Flood was not universal. That allows that Cain's descendants are around doing no good."
The Flood was local. The Hebrew term "eretz" can mean the globe but it can also mean "the land". The KJV translators chose the globe because they brought pre-formed ideas to their translation. There is no geological evidence of a global flood and there is evidence that these haplogroups were around tens of thoussands of years before the account of Noah in Genesis. I believe there was a really big flood that forms the basis for the account in Genesis but it did not wipe out the haplogroup R people who were up on the steppes of Russian at that time. It did wipe out the tribes that formed the Clans of Noah.
Since you seem to have an honest curiosity about this, I am going to put some links at the bottom. At your level of knowledge about genetics an archaelogy, you need to be careful who you are talking to on the Armstrongist side. There are people out there who are peddling fiction much like Hoeh did. (see below)
Huckleberrah - enjoy
https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2023/01/bubonic-plague-massacres-captive-women.html
https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2022/04/germany-plans-to-rearm-part-2-nations.html
"Of interest, Caucasians before the flood who lived 800 years would have 12 chromosomes instead of 8 and be ~10 feet tall."
ReplyDelete8? 12? Humans have 46 chromosomes.
The Indians in America wiped out, in a mass genocide, those who were here before them. So why should anyone feel sorry for them? And they were always killing each other and they had a fake religion which was hostile to the Bible and all truth.
ReplyDeleteYou wont like European history then...
DeleteClean your mind of the Armstrogite myths and lies and engage your brain, for once.
ReplyDeleteYou cited no evidence that I was wrong or that I hold any Armstrongist beliefs. Duh.
6:26, since you can’t read between the lines, sad, here is a SIMPLE answer for your limited abilities.
ReplyDelete1. NO.
2. NO.
Hope you can handle the truth in SIMPLE language.
* Twenty years ago, a haplogroup estimate of R-M343 or R-M269 was assumed to be a marker of non-Jewish paternal ancestry. With new scientific tools, we now know that, instead, it might indicate descendance from any number of known Jewish lineages, small and large, with probable ancient origins in the Middle East, western Asia, Africa, or the Mediterranean. These geographic origins are all consistent with ancient Jewish history and migration, not indications of the large-scale introduction of recent northern or eastern European Y-DNA into the modern Jewish population.
ReplyDeleteThe Jewish R1b Project at FTDNA is the central locus for collecting and exploring the various R1b lineages and volunteer administrators who can offer expert advice on the most efficient tests to determine which lineages each Jewish R1b belongs to. In addition, the Jewish R1b Project encourages and helps with spin-off sub-projects to study more specific subclades. The only way to determine which lineage a Jewish R1b man belongs to is advanced Y chromosome testing to and the most specific, recent haplogroup downstream of R-M343 or R-M269. (A downstream haplogroup (subclade) is a smaller (newer) haplogroup that a particular SNP defines as a more recent branch of a larger, older haplogroup. For example, R-DF27 is downstream of R-P312, meaning it's a kind of "descendant" haplogroup of P312. P312 has many distinct downstream haplogroups, such as U152, L21, etc.)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337741839_Jewish_men_in_the_most_common_European_Y-DNA_haplogroup_a_new_narrative_for_Jewish_R1b_The_FTDNA_Jewish_R1b_Project
Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b that is defined by the SNP marker M269.
Isa 36:1 In the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah's reign, Sennacherib king of Assyria attacked all the fortified cities of Judah and captured them...
"200,150 people [of Judah], great and small, male and female, horses, mules, asses, camels, cattle and sheep without number, I brought away from them and counted as spoil... as well as his [Hezekiah's] daughters, his harem, his male and female musicians, (which) he had (them) bring after me to Nineveh, my royal city" (D. D. Luckenbill, The Annals of Sennacherib, (Oriental Institute Publications, No.2), pp.11-12).
("...the number of captives is seen today widely as exaggeration" (Wikipedia, Lachish reliefs) - this is typical ancient near Eastern hyperbole).
* Sean Silver, groups.jewishgen.org/g/main/topic/70310138
(familytreedna.com/groups/jewish-r1b/about/goals)
Besides Vincent Vizachero's and my own work, there are now several projects which have shown a correlation between this Eastern R1b (colloquially called ht35), which is found in high frequencies and broad genetic variance among the Southern Anatolia, the Caucasuses, South Eastern Asia and the Levant. Conversely, this Eastern R1b presents with a very low frequency and genetic variance within Europe, particularly Western Europe. Peter Hrechdakian, the admin of the Armenian and Assyrian DNA Projects, also offers data that further CONFIRMS AN ESTABLISHED R1B PRESENCE WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA THAT WAS ONCE ASSYRIA. The Jewish clusters do indeed fit within his clusters of Middle Eastern R1b, most of whom are tightly-clustered -- none more than the Jewish clusters, which themselves are tightly clustered and distinct >from the others.
It looks like this thread is exhausted. The major points in my essay are as follows:
ReplyDelete1. Why did the WCG not have a consistent policy on Native Americans? Articles published in Pasadena had a positive view of Native Americans. Yet, concurrently, a significant number of people in local areas seem to feel that "wipe them out" was the operative principle.
2. Do Armstrongists persist even now in their belief that Native Americans are Canaanites against all scientific evidence? If so, why?
3. Is the emphasis on "wipe them out", among some in the ministry and laity, rather than why was Israel untrusting of God indicate some kind of bias. Does it show a proclivity towards violence and hatred? Does it show a desire on the part of some to lift scriptures to support modern White supremacist views?
4. Is genocide as a solution really what is written on the hearts of believers who profess Christ? Is it New Testament?
I enjoyed many of the comments and found them incisive. The least useful comments were the super-defensive who would take point 1 above, for instance, and try to de-rail constructive discussion by flapping up some dust on how I would know there were a "signifcant number".
Huckleberrah
@3:02:
ReplyDeleteBut are you talking only of descendants of Judah/Levi, which I would like to assume. Or are you are typical slob about what "Jewish" means?
3:02
ReplyDeleteThere are some problems with what you are asserting here. First, finding R1b among modern Jews is not that difficult. Jews have migrated extensively and mixed extensively. The Ashkenazim are thought to be anywhere from 30 to 70 percent European. Many of the people they mixed with were haplogroup R Europeans based on location. The Khazars are thought to have been haplogroup R. Such research does not speak to the ancient origins of Jews - only the history of their admixture. Here are some issues:
1. Abraham could not have given rise to two different y chromosome haplogroups. There cannot be Jews who are haplogroup J and haplogroup R. My guess is that you know this and you have decided that one or the other haplogroup is the true Jewish strain. My guess is that you have selected haplogroup R because this means that Northwest Europeans can be offered as the descendants of Israel. The problem with this is that Jesus, who came to his own, did not come to Northwest Europeans but to Jews living in the Middle East who anciently were haplogroup J (see my next point.) The Mizrahis are their lineal descendants.
2. In the area of the 10 tribes, there should be an extraordinary number of skeletons in burials, dating from before the Assyrian conquest, that would indicate that a dense population of haplogroup R1b peoples lived in that area. Nobody has found this. This might well be good project for you.
3. Likewise, finding a few occurrences haplogroup R in the territory of ancient Assyria lacks gravitas. You need to find a dense population of haplogroup R people from DNA extracted from ancient burials.
There are other issues but I think this is enough. You might have a look at:
https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-noachian-bottleneck-and-refutation.html
Huckleberrah
3:02 whoever you are
ReplyDeleteI just surfed around and discovered that this a piece of a text from a Journal article. I find it very interesting. Especially, this part:
"These geographic origins are all consistent with ancient Jewish history and migration, not indications of the large-scale introduction of recent northern or eastern European Y-DNA into the modern Jewish population."
I am not sure how they know how and when haplogroup R was introduced. I would like to see their methodology. I have a feeling that this is a discussion Khazarian ancestry. The Wikipoedia article "Genetic Studies in Jews" makes this statment:
"These geographic origins are all consistent with ancient Jewish history and migration, not indications of the large-scale introduction of recent northern or eastern European Y-DNA into the modern Jewish population."
This means that R1b is scattered genuinely throughout the Middle East among all ethnic groups and no more so among Jews. It is a kind of background noise of historical admixture.
The Assyrian and Armenian project finds some R1b in the area of ancient Assyria. The modern day Assyrians are a mixed people. That is they find among modern people living within the boundaries of ancient Assyria some subjects who are R1b. This tell us very little. What is relevant to the Armstrongist interpretation of history is who the ancient Assyrians are genetically. This requires excavating bones, extracting DNA from the appropriate ancient period, and identifying the haplogroup. That is in the field of archaeogenetics and that is not what this study is talking about. An essay I wrote on the Assyrians looks at the archaeogenetics, though sparse, and the Assyrians were haplogroup J as one would expect. The words in you text in all caps decidedly does not prove that the Assyrians were R1b. It does prove that there are a few people who are R1b living in the area of Old Assyria today. Not much of a statement. And we see from Wikipedia that this is to be expected throughout the Middle East.
I tried to download the article but the service wanted to burrow into my e-mail account so I have seen only a piece of the text.
Huckleberrah
I forget where, but I read something earlier this year about a notable number of Assyria-area burials returning genetics more common to Ethiopia/Somalia. Which makes total sense - we tend ti see Ethiopia as far away and backwater, but its quite clear fr9m.the Bible and other sources that they were playing a notable role in the Fertile Crescent during the monarchic period of Israel. Probably had a lot of travellers taking up residence in foreign countries and vis a vis.
DeleteRSK
ReplyDeleteThe Natufians were in Palestine in the late Neolithic. They were among the earliest occupants of what became Jericho. They were haplogroup E which is ifound widely throughout Africa. No doubt there was some interaction between Palestine and North Africa.
Huckleberrah
3:37 wrote:
ReplyDelete“ I enjoyed many of the comments and found them incisive. The least useful comments were the super-defensive who would take point 1 above, for instance, and try to de-rail constructive discussion by flapping up some dust on how I would know there were a "signifcant number". “
“Super Defensive?” Again, you exaggerate to try and make your comments in error to sound authoritative.
“Flapping up dust?” Sounds good, but again is another technique of trying to make yourself sound authoritative.
And, yes, HOW “would you know there were a significant number?” From very few examples?
I enjoy your responses. As Doc Holiday liked to say, “most instructive.”
Follower
There is a Youtube video about Indian origins where he clearly says that new haplogroups are created from existing people. Otherwise you would need 20 gods to create 20 separate races. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2FlcQGYYms
ReplyDelete