The Truth About Anti-Church of God Literature?
In their booklet with the same title as this post (minus the question mark), Church of God, The Eternal lamented that "Virtually every doctrine in the Church of God is now being questioned." For anyone who is familiar with the Armstrong Churches of God, this title and statement will immediately call to mind the word "hypocrisy." Considering the fact that most ACOG literature is a continuous and relentless attack on the doctrines/practices of traditional Christianity, this charge regarding "Anti-Church of God" literature smacks of "the pot calling the kettle black!"
In the same opening paragraph of COG Eternal's article, they assert that "the present proliferation of literature assailing church beliefs was promoted by the doctrinal changes which took place in the Worldwide Church of God during 1973-74." Really? Might it have something to do with problems inherent to the teachings of Herbert Armstrong? Is it possible that the numerous prophetic failures and the implosion of the Worldwide Church contributed to the phenomenon? The article even admits that more than a dozen splinter groups formed as a consequence of the demise of the parent church! Even so, later in the article, it is asserted that "the failure of an organization does not abrogate truth." I would agree with that statement, but I would also question the judgment of any individual who didn't question whether such a failed organization actually possessed the truth in the first place!
Once again, for those who are familiar with ACOG culture, the first question that this article poses about ACOG critics will come as no surprise. They ask: "Did they ever believe?" Armstrong and his minions have always reasoned that anyone who would abandon their "truth" must have never really been converted in the first place! Of course, the reasoning offered in the article to support this conclusion is circular.
They assert that the folks who have repudiated their doctrines must now believe that they were deceived in the past - "Yet, not one of these writers has admitted it." Really? I have freely admitted here and elsewhere that I allowed myself to be deceived by Herbert Armstrong. Contrary to their assertion, there was a time when I (and other critics) really believed Armstrong's teachings and even tried to convince others of them. Likewise, I have also repeatedly acknowledged my own culpability in all of this - my failure to do my due diligence in investigating and researching what Herbert was teaching!
The COG Eternal article also asserts that the literature that is critical of ACOG teaching presents "incongruous arguments" - which they claim is a manifestation of the prejudice that infects their critics. To support this charge, they offer ONE example of someone making different arguments about the size of the old Worldwide Church to suit the needs of the criticism they are putting forward. Once again, that sounds an awful lot like "the pot calling the kettle black." Herbert Armstrong and his minions twist and ignore Scripture and history to support their teachings about the history of their organization, the history of traditional Christianity, and the biblical identities of modern nations without blinking an eye. In other words, does ACOG criticism of the teachings of traditional Christianity manifest their prejudice against Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox Christians?
Another favorite argument against their critics which finds its way into this present article is their charge that their critics are motivated by emotional reactions to the past. This is probably one of the most pernicious arguments that these folks have always employed against their critics. It is a form of gaslighting. If someone is emotional, they are not being rational and objective. This argument also undermines the validity of the real experiences of the many folks who have been hurt/harmed/deceived by the ACOGs. This argument is also the cousin of the argument that their critics are simply being rebellious and/or are manifesting a "bad attitude." In other words, your criticisms aren't based on reality - they are the product of your own warped and twisted mind or thinking! In this way, they get to dismiss the criticisms without ever actually addressing/answering them.
The article goes on to assert that "distortions render everything questionable." There they go again! They are completely oblivious to and unapologetic for, their own distortions of Scripture, history, and science! Yet, all of those distortions and incongruities inherent in their own history and teachings never provoke a single question about the validity of their own culture! It never occurs to them to question the doctrines based on those distortions or the flawed men who formulated them in the first place. They never think to question the likelihood that Almighty God would use men with such glaring personal failures to "restore truth" to His Church!
The COG Eternal article then attempted to portray critics of the ACOGs as NOT practicing Christian love. They say that "true Christians...will attempt to avoid sarcasm," and "do not make specific sins of others public." Does that mean that Paul's first letter to the saints at Corinth branded him as a false Christian? You remember, the epistle where he ridiculed the congregation's tolerance of a man who was openly having an affair with his father's wife. So, Paul's sarcasm and public outing of that man was inappropriate in a "true" Christian? The article goes on to suggest that the primary objective of everyone should be to protect the truth - the clear implication being that the personal bad behavior of folks who preach the "truth" must NOT be revealed to the public!
Finally, the article advocates compartmentalization in evaluating the performance of the ACOGs. According to COG Eternal, the "truth" can be divided into three distinct and separate categories: doctrine, prophecy, and administration. This allows them to acknowledge that the ACOG culture has been responsible for many prophetic and administrative failures and still insists that those failures have no impact on the veracity/validity of doctrine. Now, do I really need to talk about the interrelatedness of these things? OR Are the problems with their compartmentalization of "truth" apparent to my readers? Do I really need to cite and quote all of the passages of Scripture that deal with exposing false teachers, teachings, and prophets? (Just in case, here are a few for those who may be interested: Deuteronomy 4:2, Matthew 7:15, Romans 16:17-18, Galatians 1:6-9, Ephesians 5:11, II Timothy 4:3-4, etc.) Is that enough? Does that nail it down?
64 comments:
The ACOG leadership's war against their critics is text book narcissism. Narcissists view forgiveness an entitlement, and the equivalent of pressing the reset button on a video game. Their wrong doing should be treated as if they never happened, with no personal consequences for themselves. The flip side of the same coin is that they never forgive others. So all ministers are blameless and it's the victims that are the problem.
Church leaders - the guys in white.
Church victims and critics - the guys in black.
Cog eternal, and particularly Jon Bishby, is plentyful with his use of logical fallacies, gaslighting, and narcissistic tactics.
Hopefully his dedicated followers will wake up and see his glaring contradictions.
The interesting thing about Brisby's claim to authority is: Raymond Cole was defrocked by HWA (the end time chosen servant, according to Brisby). This means anyone ordained by Cole is illegitimate in descent from Armstrong. Brisby claims succession, but his is illegitimate. Cog eternal is one of the few groups that was founded by someone in direct rebellion to HWA (most other splinters started after Armstrong died), yet cog eternal carries on like they're loyal followers of HWA, it is comedic, and yet sad.
The founder of Church of God, the Eternal (COGTE) was Raymond Cole who was convinced that HWA was the inspired servant of God in the 20th century. He firmly believed that what God had revealed to HWA was and is absolute i.e. divine revelation as opposed to scholarship cannot be changed. Hence, the 1974 doctrinal changes were and still are unbiblical. Raymond Cole's early experiences with his mentor, HWA as narrated in 'Who We Are' in the COGTE website is the reason for the existence of COGTE. WCG's downfall has been due to 3 factors - doctrines, prophecies and administration but Raymond Cole blamed the latter two. To him, doctrines are spiritual, not subject to change or human meddling. Prophecies can fail, administration can be abused. This is why he concentrated on teaching the pre-1974 doctrines unlike the post 1974 teaching of so many ACOGs. COGTE is the original Coke, so to speak. Jon Brisby has a big shoe to fit in with regards to his mentor, Raymond Cole. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the fateful doctrinal changes that was the biggest mistake of HWA. While it was the beginning of the end for WCG, it was the fragile beginning of COGTE. Congratulation to COGTE for carrying on God's inspired teaching for almost 50 years.
I've never seen a really coherent response to any of the Anti-ACOG Literature. Those who are criticized respond in the arcane language of their own culture. It is damage control in an attempt to keep current members from also seeing the logic presented by the critics, and considering the facts presented. And, why would they not target the area where they feel the most devastating damage might be done by their critics? Nobody else knows or cares about such miniscule cults except members, family and friends of those members, and those who left and would like to prevent other innocent ones from also being damaged.
These days, so much more is known about cults and cultic behavior than was known back in the 1950s that it is very difficult for them to gain traction. As with any other scam, once identified, grifters must move on to a new scam, because the old one has been exposed, and has lost its viability. The false prophecies and their times and dates have cast their shadow over the entire Armstrong movement, even the ACOGs which have not been as flagrant in their abuse of HWA's "hook". The proof of their marginalization lies in the small stature and profile of the groups, although ironically, they use terms like "small" and "elect" in an effort to prove that they are the chosen ones!
Miller,
You have taken on one of the most difficult problems that afflicts Splinterdom. It is the fact that they are both unyielding and non-reflective about their beliefs. They have no ability to self-evaluate. They live inside a redoubt of carefully constructed misinformation. They pride themselves in being a one-off. Armstrongism precisely fits their psychological need profile and you are telling them they have to shake loose to be a Christian.
I realized a while back that when I write something for this blog, it never connects with Armstrongists. I have been really writing, without recognizing it from the beginning, for people who have exited Armstrongism and who can benefit from having that decision affirmed through what I write. I think the same is true of you. We are writing for the post-exit audience, perforce, because that is the only place our writing has effectiveness. And the exiters exited for some reason other than what we have written. My theory.
Scout
@ 7:15 AM, you seem to be forgetting that "administration" was one of the core doctrinal teachings of the Radio Church of God. An administration that didn't teach correct prophecy was by definition a false church, as was an administration that taught false doctrine.
Also, Raymond Cole's ordination came about because of the church's administration, so if Cole wants to reject church administration he needs to reject his own ordination in order to be consistent. What Cole did in founding COGTE was to pick and choose a few select doctrines he liked, while leaving behind other doctrines and trying to diminish those as mere "prophecy" or "administration." In doing this, Cole was just another cafeteria cultist.
What were the doctrinal changes of '74
Lonnie,
You should have quoted more “cherry-picked” verses.
And, surprise, to those you love to criticize, they are certain that you, and the rest of the disgruntled critics here, are the literal fulfillment of all those scriptures you quoted. So, own up and prove you aren’t the subjects of those prophetic verses.
And, why do all here ignore the influx of people deliberately intent on destroying the WCG? The atheists even publicly bragged they did that in their publication. Why is that subject of so little importance to you.
Guess that info doesn’t fit the plan here. So, why is that fact overlooked? Please explain.
Great comments!
Thanks, Scout, I think you're right about our primary audience - folks who have already discerned problems with the theology and need support and affirmation.
Anonymous Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 7:54:00 AM PST,
You can find more passages of Scripture relative to this topic without commentary in the latest post on my own blog (God Cannot Be Contained). Also, just plug the topic into any search engine, and it will cite more passages that I didn't mention in my own remarks. I think you meant to say that it is the ACOGs who are engaged in cherry-picking prooftexts - that's their wheelhouse, not mine.
As for the Worldwide Church and its descendants, I would like a more in-depth look at just how many agnostics and atheists they have created over the years. Sorry, the narrative that outsiders, theist or atheist, invaded the Church and destroyed it simply doesn't fit. Mr. Armstrong sowed the seeds that the ACOGs are now harvesting with his own hands! In other words, the demise of the WCG was generated by forces WITHIN that organization.
A doctrinal change in '74 was the day of Pentecost from Monday to Sunday. Correct. A day after the 7th sabbath (Saturday shabbath, Strong's 7676, not shabua, week, Strong's 7620) in 50 days can only be Sunday. Lev 23:16.
Lonnie,
You wrote: “ Sorry, the narrative that outsiders, theist or atheist, invaded the Church and destroyed it simply doesn't fit. Mr. Armstrong sowed the seeds that the ACOGs are now harvesting with his own hands! In other words, the demise of the WCG was generated by forces WITHIN that organization.”
Evidently you have no experience with the people you dismiss as not fitting. And, your refusal to acknowledge the facts is very telling.
These were people who deliberately infiltrated the WCG and AC, pretending to be interested. Some were Ivy League “grads” others from various Protestant and Catholic groups, a Mason, and atheists. The Mason I dealt with personally.
So, just because you don’t, can’t, or won’t believe this invasion happened does not disprove the facts.
HWA became senile, and those around him called the shots, and told him he was doing a great mission. That’s partially how he ended up on so many medications.
The atheists bragged about attacking the worldwide, the Armstrongs and the college. And, Madelyn specifically named them in their publication. One of them, in Australia, wrote a book attacking the church, which Madelyn thought was so great.
So, you are correct that “forces WITHIN “ helped bring about the destruction of the WCG. However, they were not who you think they were.
As to cherry-picking… that’s an old as the hills atheist lingo used to knock the opponent in the eyes of the audience. Look up How to Win Every Argument books and you’ll learn more of their tricks.
If you would like to see the atheist quotes on their attack, speak up, and I will post them for you.
Love reading your posts Lonnie, they reveal a lot.
Wow! Now I know who to thank for taking out the rotten bastards who were the authors of the horrendous child abuse I and my siblings endured for many years. These cretins also caused my DSM IV Axis 2 personality disorders, and nearly caused the death of one of my siblings who was at death's door with a totally curable ailment!
Dear Atheists, if you are not simply a figment of 12:34's imagination, I'd like to thank you for your work! You may not believe in Him, but you surely did God's work by taking out the garbage (HWA/WCG/AC). Oh, and by the way, you may be atheists, but you are OUR atheists. You know, the enemy of our enemy?
Yep, Read it again!!!!
Wow! Now I know who to thank for taking out the rotten bastards who were the authors of the horrendous child abuse I and my siblings endured for many years. These cretins also caused my DSM IV Axis 2 personality disorders, and nearly caused the death of one of my siblings who was at death's door with a totally curable ailment!
Dear Atheists, if you are not simply a figment of 12:34's imagination, I'd like to thank you for your work! You may not believe in Him, but you surely did God's work by taking out the garbage (HWA/WCG/AC). Oh, and by the way, you may be atheists, but you are OUR atheists. You know, the enemy of our enemy?
Three times a charm!!!
Wow! Now I know who to thank for taking out the rotten bastards who were the authors of the horrendous child abuse I and my siblings endured for many years. These cretins also caused my DSM IV Axis 2 personality disorders, and nearly caused the death of one of my siblings who was at death's door with a totally curable ailment!
Dear Atheists, if you are not simply a figment of 12:34's imagination, I'd like to thank you for your work! You may not believe in Him, but you surely did God's work by taking out the garbage (HWA/WCG/AC). Oh, and by the way, you may be atheists, but you are OUR atheists. You know, the enemy of our enemy?
The Cole family goes way, way back to the early days of the COG7 in Oregon. Raymond and Wayne were there when HWA preached some of his first sermons. Yes, the Coles were there for the whole thing from the very beginning. When most of the local COG7 congregation finally had enough, the Coles were still lapping it up. To this day there are elders in the Oregon COG7's who remember HWA, or whose parents told them about him, and told me he was a very arrogant man, wanted to be in charge, made countless false predictions in the COG7, and the incest was rumored even back then. Somehow the Coles overlooked this and were enamored with the "holy day plan of salvation" and were some of the few original COG7 members who did not dismiss HWA as a false prophet. Raymond even believed the incest stories were true. How did he overlook that and still think HWA was somebody? Raymond would have been around when the first few years of false prophecy Plain Truth articles were coming out.. Yet Raymond went on to become one of the first students to attend and graduate ambassador college. The Coles were bewitched.
The problem goes beyond HWA: COG7 was a plagued mix mash of rising characters with unique spins on everything from "sacred names" to the familiar holy days and British Israelism. The COG7 was even making a "true church of God" lineage claim back then. However now they are relatively indistinguishable from the 7th day Baptists, choosing to not spend a lot of time talking about their unique doctrines on trinity, annihilationism, holidays and sabbath. Those who know history, know that the COG7 is descended from the Millerites, who after the repeated failed prophecies of the mid 1800’s, began to wonder why God didn't come back in 1844, theorizing it was because the church should be keeping the sabbath.. And some of them began to believe the prophecies of Ellen white, and others did not, so there was a COG schism, the Adventists separated. Later some sacred Namers came out, and eventually the WCG. Even the Jehovah's Witnesses came out of the movement. So, as we can plainly deduce, Millerism is the original harlot with the Nicolaitan doctrines, and many cult daughters came from it. The same schisms and splits and false whacky predictions have been taking place from the same lineage for almost 200 years now, and Lord only knows what inspired William Miller to be the father of so many cults, but they all seem to have adapted his tactic of just changing your date to further down the road when it fails to manifest, and eventually just blame the people for God "delyaing His coming."
Cole invented his “tripartite” division of “doctrine/prophecy/administration” as a way to get around all the drama, and carry on the teachings of the holy day plan of salvation, Chosen servant, and Monday Pentecost “truth.” Cole was smart enough to avoid prophecy, and that stigma exists to this day, as Jon Brisby generally avoids the topic. Cole no doubt knew the best ammo the people had to discredit the whole damn thing, would be all the false prophecies. For years the church was told that HWA merely speculated, and it doesn’t nullify doctrine just because he was wrong. But a thinking mind would say, Does God use a man who’s completely full of crap in one area, but we are supposed to believe in a different area, he’s God’s only man? The first one in 1850/1900 years? As HWA claimed? Apparently, God was so behind the curve, that He had to seek out a skilled salesman who had an extensive history of writing persuasive witticisms intended to subconsciously get people to buy a product and make the business money… yes, God needed just such a MAN!! (totally not the characteristics of a cult leader) And this perfect man just so happened to make lots of false predictions, some emphatically in Gods name, but was also the ONLY man God could use to show the world that the gates of hell overcame all of Christendom for 1900 years… Never mind the doctrinal flip flops through the 30’s and 40’s on things like Pentecost, clean meats, church government.. and oh yes, the proven incest allegations, the Japanese boy allegations, the alcoholism, the masturbation diary, the GTA chronicles. The whole thing always was a charade, and COGE just has its own spin. What we really need to ask, is how the movement has such power over people, that even when confronted with blatant contradictions and doctrinal error, they just become angry, shut down, or justify all manner of ungodly behavior by comparing it to David and Bathsheba? Maybe the Mein Kampf in the desk drawer was the magic ingredient. Maybe all cults have found a way to prey on the people’s desire to deify a man, rather than worship a deity who became a man. -Raymond’s Grandson
So much I'd like to answer throughout the post and the comments...
"They assert that the folks who have repudiated their doctrines must now believe that they were deceived in the past - "Yet, not one of these writers has admitted it." Really? I have freely admitted here and elsewhere that I allowed myself to be deceived by Herbert Armstrong..."
I imagine any work by an ex-member is going to state that (if it's a personal account) or imply it (if it aims for a less personal telling). Those written by outsiders looking in (like, say, Walter Martin or Bob Larson) obviously won't.
"Another favorite argument against their critics which finds its way into this present article is their charge that their critics are motivated by emotional reactions to the past."
But didn't they claim that none of the writers admitted being deceived? That seems like a non sequitur, but OK.
"I realized a while back that when I write something for this blog, it never connects with Armstrongists."
I am not specifically addressing Scout or Lonnie here, as I think what I'm about to say applies also to commenters, not just those who write posts: Remember how so often Armstrongist writers skewered a cartoon caricature of Christianity to make their supposed points? One of the reasons it was effective was that the new converts eating that stuff up were often the nominal or less-knowledgable Christians whose existence was at the heart of that overexaggerated caricature. Now, that state of existence was not entirely those people's fault. They were not new converts to Christianity, they had inherited it from their parents and grandparents. Even HWA fell into this category - he wasn't exactly a leader among the Quakers. So when we come on here and start talking about concepts that such individuals may never have understood in the first place, it's easy to dismiss. "Grace" - what's that? "Exegesis", "hypostase", "parousia", "pascha", "midrash", "passion", blah blah blah. The problem is doubled for those like me who were born into Armstrongism or brought in as small children - we REALLY didn't know what all that was unless we did some seriously unapproved reading!
"And, why do all here ignore the influx of people deliberately intent on destroying the WCG? The atheists even publicly bragged they did that in their publication. Why is that subject of so little importance to you."
You're going to have to be more detailed as to who and what you're talking about.
I think Anon 7:15 is Jon Brisby coming here to anonymously defend his honor. His post reads like his monthly letters.
Guys! This is just so awesome to see such insightful comments made by a member of the Cole family!
Good job, Dan. I assume your mom raised you well!
BB
Actually, under Jon Brisby, COGTE "has not" faithfully carried on those teachings. There are a number of the teachings that Brisby has cleverly inserted his own ideas and concepts into. Maybe Monday Pentecost?
I've said this a million times concerning these splinters and their claims of being "the one true church". If COGTE is the one true church, or if Restored is, or whoever; which also goes hand in hand with the statement that Christ is present in one church alone, and not in any of the others (I've heard Brisby say), then they have a lot of explaining to do regarding Revelation 1:13. Since Christ himself said that he stands in the "midst" of those different, not so different 7 churches in chapters 2 & 3, then each and every one of these charlatans has some explaining to do. So look at it like this; the churches of today, and the HWA splinters (to me at least), are nothing more than a mirror of what was left of the church after the first century charlatans got their hands on it. This is true; anyone who is a part of the "true church" will be known by their fruits, which means they are scattered everywhere.
Maybe all cults have found a way to prey on the people’s desire to deify a man, rather than worship a deity who became a man. -Raymond’s Grandson
Well said! The Crux Of Armstrongism, … and ALL of its spin-offs!
When I was 30-something, I remember one Sabbath in UCG, a 60-something lady of the congregation exhorted me, "Don't read any religious materials from elsewhere, otherwise it might turn you away from the truth".
I thought then as I do now, I don't expect the truth to be so fragile as to be easily spoiled by falsehood. But ever since 1995, I resolved to subject all truth-claims to scrutiny, whether from inside or outside.
Indeed, they are doing nothing more than that which is captured in Matthew chapter 17. They desire to build a tabernacle to a man while pretending that Jesus is the one being worshipped.
Matthew 17:4-5 KJV
[4] Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. [5] While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
Who is God pleased with? The one who hears and worships him and his son. No man is in that equation. Not a man from the past, and certainly no man from today.
Contra 10:54, "weeks" is the right translation of sabbatot in Lev 23:16.
Mat 12:8 For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath [sabbatou - gen sq neut]. (ESV).
Lk 18:12 I fast twice in the week [sabbatou - gen sq neut].
“I fast twice in the week,.... Not "on the sabbath", as the words may be literally rendered, and as they are in the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions; for the sabbath was not a fasting, but a feasting day with the Jews;... But the word is rightly rendered, "in the week"; the whole seven days, or week, were by the Jews commonly called the sabbath; hence ... "the first of the sabbath", and the second of the sabbath, and the third of the sabbath (Maimon. Hilch. Mechosre Caphara, c. 2. sect, 8); that is, the first, second, and third days of the week” (John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible).
Lev 23:15 And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath [sabbat] ... seven [seba] sabbaths [sabbatot] shall be complete [tamim]:
Lev 23:15b seven weeks shall there be complete; ; (JPS Tanakh 1917).
Lev 23:16 Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.
Lev 23:16a even unto the morrow after the seventh week shall ye number fifty days; (JPS Tanakh 1917).
“seven sabbath-weeks. seba ‘sabbatot. The term sabbat here clearly means weeks ... and is distinguished from the usual term sabua‘ by the fact that it ends with the sabbath... counted weeks may start or end on any day” (Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 23-27, AB, Vol.3, p.1998).
Jacob Milgrom suggests “that the week’s completeness is stressed to make sure that the week ends with the sabbath. This is also the deduction of R. Hiyya (Lev. Rab. 28;22; cf. m. Hag 2:4)” Leviticus 23-27, AB, Vol.3, p.2001).
Nu 28:26 Also in the day of the firstfruits, when ye bring a new meat offering unto the LORD, after your weeks [sabu‘ot] be out, ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work:
“Confirming that “Sabbaths” (pl. of sabbat) in this context means “weeks” comes from Numbers 28:26, where the usual word for weeks (pl. of sabua‘), refers to the same period of time. The fact that in Leviticus 23:15 “Sabbaths” are weeks buttresses the argument that “the day after the Sabbath” earlier in the same verse refers to the weekly Sabbath rather than a yearly ceremonial rest” (Roy Gane, Leviticus/Numbers, NIVAC, p.390).
Dt 16:9a Seven weeks [sabu‘ot] shalt thou number unto thee: begin to number the seven weeks from such time as thou beginnest to put the sickle to the corn.
“Seven sabbaths - More properly, seven weeks (compare Deu 16:9). The word Sabbath, in the language of the New Testament as well as the Old, is used for “week” (Lev 25:8; Mat 28:1; Luke 18:12, etc.)” (Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible).
Lev 23:15 And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:
“15-21 The Feast of Weeks is called the Feast of Harvest in Exodus 23:16 and the “firstfruits of the wheat harvest” in Exodus 34:22 (cf. Num 28:26-31; Deut 16:9-12). As mentioned in v.10 it always occurred on the first day of the week and would fall seven weeks and one day after the Sabbath after the full moon of the Passover (14 Nisan). From the day after the Passover Sabbath to the day after the Pentecost Sabbath is “fifty days” (v.16) by inclusive reckoning, counting both the first and last days...” (R. Laird Harris, Leviticus, EBC, Vol. 2, pp.625-26).
“Counting the day when the barley sheaf is elevated as day 1, the Festival of Weeks comes after seven complete Sabbaths (v.15)... The one-day pilgrim festival of Weeks fell on the day after the seventh Sabbath, that is, Sunday, which would be the fiftieth day according to customary inclusive reckoning (Lev 23:16)” (Roy Gane, Leviticus/Numbers, NIVAC, p.390).
RSK wrote, “So when we come on here and start talking about concepts that such individuals may never have understood in the first place, it's easy to dismiss.”
To dismiss an expansion in the field of knowledge that one regards as vital is not a rational response. It is the response of someone who does not really have a serious interest in that field of knowledge. Or has personal reasons to not want to see understanding progress. There are a number of observations to make here.
I have many times witnessed Armstrongists deride education and theological inquiry. What the Armstrongist laity understands about the Bible is rigidly circumscribed by the know-it-all Armstrongist ministry. To step outside the circumscription is to expose yourself to being disfellowshipped. In this environment, rejecting the serious study of the Bible becomes a test of loyalty in whatever Armstrongist denomination. With the Bible owned by the ministry, Armstrongism becomes very much like the Roman Catholicism of the Middle Ages where the Priesthood owned the Bible. If you assume to yourself the position of know-it-all, you are rendered ineducable. With this principle in operation, you often run into a pride in ignorance among Armstrongists. It is reflected in such statements like, “I am a simple country boy and the Bible is written so that I can understand it.”
The Bible is deeper than any of can imagine. But it can operate at different levels. For instance, I believe in remote areas in the First Century, there were Christians who believed in an anthropomorphic God. I don’t think this mistaken idea hurt anyone under those circumstances. It is not the work of accumulating accurate knowledge that saves, but rather Jesus living his life in us through the Holy Spirit. Knowledge is, of course, part of the picture but its extent varies with the persons capabilities for engagement. And further, none of us will ever into eternity have perfect knowledge of God – an idea that some Armstrongists curiously reject. I think they reject the idea because if you are God-as-God-is-God you must naturally have perfect knowledge of God.
But, alas, the Simple Country Boy and God-as-God-is-God models lack any exegetical support. And someone who turns derisively away from the term “exegesis” will likely find Paradise inhospitable where we will all be growing “in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”
Scout
" With this principle in operation, you often run into a pride in ignorance among Armstrongists. It is reflected in such statements like, “I am a simple country boy and the Bible is written so that I can understand it.”"
This is also part of the conditioning of Armstrongism. The man himself described it when recounting how effective writing for advertising was explained to him - "Use only plain, simple words - those that someone of only a fourth grade education can understand".
Even Adolf Hitler enumerated this in Mein Kampf - I forget the exact sentence now but a close rendition would be "The message must always be directed at the lowest skill level and never at the so-called intelligentsia".
COGlodytes were brought up on this pablum, so to speak.
Do they still hold that duck meat is unclean over in COGTE?
The weeks to Pentecost are indeed 7 day "shabua(s)" but Lev 23:16 refers to the day when those weeks end, the shabbath.
A comparison of Lev 23:10-21 with Joshua 5:10-11 indicates the 14th, the Passover, was Saturday in the year of entering the land which may be 1454 BC, and the next day, Sunday, was the first day of counting 50 days to Pentecost, Pentecost being the 50th day.
Even using fourth grade words, members knowledge can still be increased. For instance, there are many examples of negotiation in the bible that can be used in a sermon on this topic. A country boy vocabulary can adequately cover this.
Yet contrary to Christ's life example, cults like the ACOGs narrow rather than expand their members knowledge and thinking. It's Big Brother 101.
Yes, and a whole host of other things like "white rice", brown sugar, non-organic produce and non-organic anything, saucy food, meat cooked too rare, meat with too much fat on it, organ meat, pasteurized milk and others. For a while coffee was bad, then it was good again. There was a super wacky period when everyone was trying to source fertilized eggs. Goats milk used to be a thing. Everybody used to take "Fiberex." You pretty much have to spend a small fortune on deliberately sourced organic foods to be acceptable. If you don't, better keep it to yourself, and don't bring that garbage to potlucks. And "if you're going to eat garbage food, don't waste Gods time saying a blessing over it" has been said a few times. Also, if you have any medical issue, even something easily treatable, you are to do nothing but get anointed and pray. Letting yourself die a slow miserable death is the new norm. Vitamins are also considered a lack of faith now, as well as all doctor visits, even for diagnosis purposes (except for the tooth doctor of course). Brisby got himself a "Do Not Resuscitate" aka DNR bracelet, and lemmings ran out to do the same. Yes CPR is contradicting Gods fragile master plan.
They don't have an obligatory British Israel booklet!
Are they de-emphasizing this central Armstrong belief?
DNR bracelets make sense for people who are older and have medical issues. Have you seen the "success" rate of CPR in older people? The small percentage who are resuscitated usually have serious brain damage and die before too long. Doctors know these depressing statistics and they have DNR orders at a much higher percentage than the general population. CPR doesn't work as well as is portrayed on television.
(looking suspiciously at tonight's pot roast)
If in doubt boil the pot roast - Lev 8:31.
Unbelievable! Cole and Brisby were so enamored with HWA's original Divorce and Remarriage doctrine that DNR bracelets are now a thing???
Who knew an ambulance was in reality a satanic box on wheels, with satans little helpers inside? Trying to save people against Gods clear will for them to die. Snake on a stick? devils trick! Stitches? enjoy your eternal sleep in lake of fire ditches. Bandaid? You lack faith. antibiotics? try drinking a little wine with raw honey and a garlic clove up your ass. ...followed by a couple 40's and a half bottle of vodka. That is the COG way. You heretics will one day see we were God all along.
1Co 16:2a Upon the first of the week let every one of you lay by him in store
1Co 16:2 Upon the first of the sabbath [gen sg neut] let every one of you lay by him in store
“Upon the first day of the week - Greek, “On one of the Sabbaths.” The Jews, however, used the word Sabbath to denote the week; the period of seven days; Mat 28:1; Mar 16:9; Luke 18:12; 24:1; John 20:1; 20:19; compare Lev 23:15; Deu 16:9. It is universally agreed that this here denotes the first day of the week...” (Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible).
Lev 23:16a you must count until the day after the seventh week — fifty days (Baruck A. Levine, JPS Torah Commentary)
10:29 writes:
"but Lev 23:16 refers to the day when those weeks end, the shabbath."
While it is possible, it is more likely that ‘sabbat’ means “week” — in keeping with the counting of seven weeks complete.
Dt 16:9 Seven weeks thou dost number to thee; from the beginning of the sickle among the standing corn thou dost begin to number seven weeks (YLT).
“The name of the festival is derived from the fact that it is observed exactly seven weeks after the onset of the harvest. The passage of seven weeks (“the weeks appointed for reaping,” Jer 5:24) is an essential aspect of the festival. Until seven weeks have passed, it is not known whether the harvest will be successfully completed and plentiful enough to sustain life and not be damaged by late rain or pests...” (Jeffrey H. Tigay, Deuteronomy, JPS Torah Commentary, p.156).
Lev 23:16a even unto the morrow after the seventh week shall ye number fifty days; (JPS Tanakh 1917).
Lev 23:11b on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.
“Verse 15-16 use the term shabbat in the sense of “week”; verse 11 uses the abbreviated shabbat in the normal sense of a particular day, the Sabbath...” (Baruck A. Levine, Leviticus, JPS Torah Commentary, p.158).
Lev 23:16a You shall count until the day after the seventh sabbath-week fifty days (Jacob Milgrom, AB (personal translation).
Lev 23:16a even unto the morrow after the seventh week shall you number fifty days (The Soncino Chumash)
“seventh week, lit., ‘the seventh sabbath’; but it is to be translated ‘week’ with the Targum (Rashi)” (The Book of Leviticus, The Soncino Chumash, p.752).
Its sunday, its sunday, its freaking sunday and only an incompetent cult leader would/could try to jam some flawed horrible logic to justify a special date just for THEM. Sorry, you still failed, ever heard of Pentecost Monday? a CATHOLIC HOLY DAY? shoooot, maybe make up a convoluted way to count to tuesday next time
I truly appreciate Dan's input on COGTE. Hope he will tell more as he has a first hand experience (3rd generation) with COGTE/WCG/Radio Church of God/COG7. This is helpful to those who still believe that COGTE is the true remnant of God's Church. By the way, Dan, are you still with COGTE or have abandoned it all for normal Christianity?
Ironically, I got a bunch of Armstrongism exposed books from my grandpas library. Even a signed copy from the author of "the truth shall set you free" (Tuit I think). I had these sources available for years, flipped through them curiously, but the brainwash blinders were still strong, and I would laugh and put them back on the shelf. I've never been a perfect bible guru, or Doctor of Theology, but certain verses in the bible always stood out to me. And over the years as I gained intellect, I would hear things in sermons directly contradict the verses I remembered. I would then feverishly search through the bible during sermons trying to find the verse I was thinking of. Gave me something to do besides space out. It helps I never believed we were the only people God gave a crap about, and so many eureka moments over the years helped facilitate my waking, but it's just so sad that it took so long. I could probably write a book (as could most WW folk I’m sure) about all the wacky things I’ve seen and heard. Quick summary, it became increasingly obvious that things weren't all they were cracked up to be, and I began to DARE to do a little research. "Armstrongisms 300 errors exposed" was probably the most useful book at the early stages. I didn't agree with everything, some of the brainwash was still resilient and long suffering, but it was fascinating to see what "normal" Christians thought and what their reasoning was. See, for years I believed that "regular Christians" were just a bunch of pagan morons that simply believed you play a harp on a cloud when you die, because that's what the church told me.
Yes
Same thing happened to us. Hearing scriptures being twisted and taken out of context in sermons to the point where we had to do our own research. It’s amazing when you actually let the other side have its day in court and let yourself be cross examined. Thanks for sharing Dan!
I would like to echo the positive comments here regarding Dan's contributions to the thread. Dan's comments here have been inspirational and hopeful - demonstrating once again that there can be life and good things on the other side of Armstrongism.
Scout at 7:37:
You are accomplishing much good for the audience that you are reaching, so keep doing what you are doing as long as you are motivated and able. I realized some of the same things you stated regarding the Armstrongites early on from the reactions of my parents to the many terminal bomb shells that I and some of my siblings dropped on their religion. Oddly enough, when the Tkach corrections came into play, they went along with them, and seemed happy with their realization of the New Covenant. But, something snapped, and somehow they ended up returning to the old vomit a couple years later. I hate to say it, but at that point I realized that the only way I would ever get to enjoy a pleasant and cordial relationship with them in this lifetime would be in the event that they were hit by Alzheimers.
In our lifetimes, we have certainly witnessed others becoming radicalized by various ideologies and theories. Obviously, just as in the case of radical Islam, or Q-Anon, the beliefs of Armstrongism possess the capability of radicalization and can potentially cause death and revolution, as we witnessed through the activities of another Millerite group, David Koresh and the Branch Davidians. So, it is a good thing that the splintering process has rendered the ACOG groups inert and powerless, limiting their scale. Anyone with current members of these groups in their families is in a codependent relationship, as the weirdness does have its own peculiar effects, but for the most part, members are only inflicting the biggest damage upon themselves.
I've always said that upon death, we receive the answers to all of the deep philosophical questions which can drive and plague our lives. Or, not. And, if not, nothingness is the greatest peace of all.
I've noticed sincere Christians have the hardest time leaving. The unique doctrines have become inseparable from who they have been told Christ is, and the deconstruction process takes time, even years to undo. So much brain circuitry has to get rewired. The irreligious atheis/agnostict types seem to have an easier time deciding "the hell with it, I quit!" And go right into the world. Though I've noticed they can have not darkened the door of any religious institution for decades but still have a slight arrogant delight in telling people Christmas is pagan, pork is unclean or that the "Catholic church changed the sabbath" etc. As if this arcane knowledge still grants them some form of superiority, even though they are not religious people. Can't blame them all though. The ACOGS are great at turning out atheists.
A king, Hebrew melek-[to follow his word is required], a Hebrew word picture (Hebrew Word Pictures, Dr Frank T Seekins, C2020), from a root word counselor, mala=word, lecha=[go! come now], in other words: a leader, a dictator (what he says goes) of fierce countenance, a vehement face, and understanding dark sentences, puzzles, conundrums, tricks, sententious maxims, hard questions, shall arise, and his power shall be mighty but not by his own power, and he shall corrupt to an extraordinary degree, and shall prosper, and do his thing, and shall corrupt numerous saints, a people as a congregated unit, a flock. And through his policy, intelligence, he shall cause craft, deceit, fraud, treachery to prosper, break out, push by his hand, and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace, during a time of security, abundance, prosperity, quietness, shall corrupt many, from the evening beginning the Day of Atonement, September 30, 1979 to the morning of January 16, 1986, 2300 evenings and mornings, 2300 days each beginning at sunset. ???? Paraphrase-Daniel 8, Strong’s
Actually I want the bastard to live again but only after 1000 years to “face the music”. But not until after the 1000 years - Rev 20:5.
Deuteronomy 23:2
A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.
Hebrews 12:8
But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
Dan, that comment reminds me of an experience one gentleman shared on an old "WCG-dissident" forum probably twenty years ago. On the day he left the church, he went to the supermarket, and bought a pound of pork bacon. He went home, got out his frying pan, cooked it up and ate it, deciding that that day would mark the beginning of the rest of his life. In those days, he had been a prolific participant in the forums. He wrote a lot of enjoyable and even iconic commentary for several years, and I can only assume in his absence that eventually he just went on with his life.
I don't know that everyone realizes how sharing our post-Armstrong experiences, learning how each of us has dealt with the ways in which the church deceived us, robbed us, and set us back, helps us. But it does. It is a multi-faceted thing, in that many personality types are involved. So glad to have you around! Hope you decide to stick around for a while.
8:40
Thanks much for the affirming words. I have many friends who are still Armstrongists. I feel that they are unreachable. I believe they will be evangelized post-mortem. But I have empathy for their present condition. I am also deliriously happy that I was released from my imprisonment to Armstrongism. In this complex of emotions, I find my motivation to write.
Scout
Dan
If you are interested, a lot of people have contacted me to have you tell the story of your family through your experience. If you're up to it, let me know...
no2hwa@yahoo.com
Dan,
I agree with no2hwa@yahoo.com to tell your story as it has authenticity and originality. Your account so far has begun to unlock a bit of the shackles that have been binding me all these years in following COGTE's teachings.
When I worked at AC Big Sandy years ago, I did a hands-on project on a house in Longview that was to be occupied by a manager in the Feast Site Construction Group. He was going to move down from Wisconsin Dells. A foreman and I did the project after hours. The foreman dropped me off and picked me and my equipment up, as I recall.
A construction group guy was there and so was Wayne Cole. I started work and Cole immediately figured out how he could help. He and I worked the entire project together. He was efficient and effective. He was wearing a suit and tie. He was not afraid to get his hands dirty. Very unlike the administrators and faculty at AC Big Sandy. Generally, the people of rank tried their best to ignore your presence as a worker. My foreman mentioned that the construction manager who was going to move into the house did not lift a hand while Cole worked energetically. Cole was a better person and I have always had a high opinion of him, other than theology. Our paths never crossed again.
Scout
This is off topic but Scout mentioned construction and I have a construction story to tell.
Years ago, a young elder was transferred into our area and decided to build a house. Of course, all the church's artisans, framers, roofers, plumbers, etc. volunteered their services to the cause at no charge. Fast forward a few years and said minister was transferred out. He sold the house and made a tidy sum thanks to the free labor.
You would have thought the boys would have received at least a cook out and few beers out of the deal, but noooooo!
Here is a little story which helps illustrate why Armstrongites are unreachable.
In 1966 when I was part of the entering Freshman class at Ambassador College, Pasadena, somebody decided that our dorm should have a Friday night "ice breaker" session. I'd given and listened to ice breaker speeches in Spokesmens Club back at home, so mentally prepared something along those lines.
What I discovered was that the upper classmen all had stories as to how they came to be at Ambassador College which were twinged with assorted supernatural events which had brought them to the college. Of course, in those days, being somewhat naive, I took these stories all in at face value. I mean students at "God's College" wouldn't make things like that up, would they?
I did not have any such supernatural events to relate. I had literally come to AC to escape the three horrible beatings my WCG parents administered every single day, still at age 18, knowing that discipline had been much more lenient at SEP than at home. I'd certainly never heard any stories of AC students getting spanked! Also, I was still dependent on my parents in several important areas which would have been abruptly terminated had I chosen one of "the world's" colleges or universities. In retrospect, I should have gone to a secular college, because my interests and aptitudes are technically orientated as opposed to being people oriented.
I can understand people allowing their fertile imaginations to go wild when a collection of people stress that members only become members through a calling, and they probably even believe their embellished memories. We've seen that this is how you get a Bob Thiel, or a Zerrubbabel. I do know that some of those with spiritual stories did end up leaving, but the names of some have come up in our discussions here as ministers in the different splinters.
Whether or not their memories are imaginary, there's no way facts or our personal experiences can compete with those things. Something of equal impact must happen in their lives to counter those memories. We are all, it would seem, hard-wired with a need to feel special.
Heh, I heard about a situation in the local congregation a few years after I left where a few people claimed to have "visions".
Rudimentary psychology kicked in; with so much attention paid to the "visionaries", many more people suddenly had visions.
Of course none of the visions held true.
ok but let's not give too much credit to the Dr. Jack Kevorkian bedside manner
All I know is someone has to want to wake up. Otherwise, you're talking to a brick wall. Best thing you can do is pray for them and be there if they have questions. You have to use your brain. God is waiting for them to ask, seek, knock and try all things. He rewards those who seek Him and answers. If you spend your life believing being a Berean is a sin.. you will have only yourself to blame on judgement day when you are told it was all a lie and that you should have evaluated things..
Very well put. I was in that box once, but Bereaned my way out of it.
pfffft you morons don't actually think YOU can UNDERSTAND the BIBLE do YOU? It's a coded book. Just throw your bibles away and do what the ministry says, which is probably mostly something akin to "pay your tithe, I need more plane rides"
7:19 1/19 “‘normal’ Christianity?!” I’m sorry but what is ”normal” Xianity except the Xianity a Xian asserts is the church s/he is a member of.
Or more trips to Tennessee, Europe, Africa, Australia, etc ... I'll still keep my Bible thank you.
In my early zealot years, I was looking for the best "anti" book I could find so I could see just how the world viewed the "truth" and why we were considered to be a cult. The best I could find at that time was "Armstrongism", by Dr. R.L. Sumner, 1974, Biblical Evangelist Press (shown with the anti books above).
The book proved to be a great disappointment! The very things Sumner accused Armstrong of (deception, perversion, distortion, fabrication, and contradiction), he himself was blatantly himself guilty of. I could fill a book with examples!
The basis of the book was Sumner's personal evaluation and doctrinal interpretation of Armstrong in the light of historical Christianity, which was Sumner's professed authority. The problem was, he himself, being a good Baptist, was out of sinc with historical Christianity on many issues. He even AGREED with Armstrong on certain things, but acted as if Armstrong was wrong anyway.
I've pointed this out before on past posts that one of Sumner's biggest faux pas was concerning the sabbath and Sunday. He goes to great lengths proving from historic sources that Sunday, being the first day of the week, is the day for worship. Then, a hundred pages later, he says it is questionable whether Saturday was (is) the 7th day sabbath??? (see pages 80-81, 199-200, 203-204).
Another jewel is found in Ch.12, "The Armstrong teaching about Liquor". He approaches this as a good Baptist as if only Armstrong is guilty of this vice, while totally ignoring the fact that the majority of Orthodox Christianity drinks. But that admission would explode his original premise.
As an example of his contradictory scholarship, Sumner attempts to prove 2 things about wine.
1. The wine of the Bible is sinful and should be avoided.
2. The wine of the Bible is grape juice.
Therefore, drinking grape juice is Sin (emphasis mine)!!
Had Sumner confined his efforts to Armstrong's extravagance, questionable methods, foolish claims, prophetic errors, abuse of power and funds, this book might have had some worth. Instead it was just a long drawn out attempt to convert one to the Baptist way of thinking. This guy was no biblical scholar by any means. Check it out for yourself.
You forgot to mention the parts where he talks about Armstrongers drunken reputation, especially at the feast as noted by hotel staff..
One of the biggest sticklers holding people trapped in armstrongism are the Holy Days.
I found COG7 had a great booklet on it with so many good points I was freed of that little conviction. I have the booklet scanned on computer and can email anyone interested.
In the meantime, this is the snippet from their website:
The Church of God (Seventh Day) does not require observance of the annual Hebrew holy days in Leviticus 23. This is why:
The annual holy days were part of the Levitical law of the old covenant and were intimately linked to its system of animal sacrifices.
The annual holy days were neither creation ordinances nor part of the Ten Commandments, but they belong to a portion of law that may be called ceremonial.
The annual holy days were commanded to the nation of Israel when she departed from Egypt, and they were to be observed where the Lord placed His name: Jerusalem.
The annual holy days have an agricultural framework, inextricably tied to the land, crops, and climate of ancient Palestine.
The annual holy days were observed according to an ancient (Hebrew) calendar that is impossible to decipher from Scripture.
The purpose of the annual holy days was for the Hebrew nation to celebrate her own history and to anticipate the greater salvation that would come through Messiah.
Observance of the annual holy days often casts a shadow on the final work of redemption and grace that was accomplished by Christ on the cross.
Post a Comment