For sixteen years, Samuel W. Kitchen would not touch the tithe. Not a dime. Not a widow's mite. Not even a spiritually significant Amazon gift card. He labored with his own fingers, as Isaiah apparently requires, and he did this because he believed a man cannot handle the holy tenth without proper authorization from Jesus Christ.
Then last year Christ worked through an ordained elder in the Philippines who was between COG church-hopping jobs at the time, who issued the missing paperwork directly channeled from Christ himself. The windows of heaven opened. The windows of Iowa, regrettably, did not.
Kitchen's latest pastoral update explains the situation with the calm of a man who has just discovered that declining personal revenue and rising ecclesiastical privilege are the same miracle wearing two hats.
"This last year, since receiving authorization from Jesus Christ, my personal labors has been shrinking," he writes, "but at the same time God has replaced it with tithes and offerings from the Church!"
One can almost hear the squeegee hit the bucket.
He is careful to insist this is not panhandling. Panhandling is when a man asks strangers for money because work dried up. This is different. This is when a man asks followers for money because work dried up and a verse in Zechariah now points at his household. The distinction is doctrinal. Also postal. Checks may be sent to P.O. Box 126, Fairfield, Iowa, in the name of Support Services of the Worldwide Church of God, or simply to Samuel Kitchen, who is not making himself anything.
For sixteen-plus years he denied himself the tithe. Christ dispatched Jonathan Dicen, an elder who authorized the collection of Tithes and Offerings in the USA and then, in a plot twist worthy of the Book of Acts, took another position with another COG and severed the connection. Does a departing co-signer void the note? Kitchen has thought about this. No. Otherwise, marriages would be null, ordinations would be null, and more importantly, the P.O. box would be empty.
He is not ordained by any man. He is merely authorized to receive the money that ordained men receive. The difference will be explained after the deposit clears.
Kitchen's credentials are otherwise airtight. In 1991 his father held him up like Hannah with Samuel, which in Iowa is how one applies for end-time employment. Nineteen years later - a complete time cycle, naturally - the work came online. A demon-possessed woman once shrieked at his father in a Wisconsin Dells restaurant. Gerald Waterhouse once implied a special job. Kitchen originally assumed Dad was one of the Two Witnesses. He now realizes Satan was after the children the whole time, which is convenient, because the children are the ones with the website.
Zechariah 6 involves his family. Josiah-Hen is the household where the tithes go so Joshua may be plucked from the fire and given crowns, which is the completion of the Philadelphia era, which is to say please stop funding the other groups. Those groups exist, Kitchen explains, because the devil does not want you protected. He wants you dead. The practical application is that your first tenth should not go to them.
Isaiah 17:7-8 is pressed into service as a business plan. Do not look to the altars. Do not look to the work of the ministry. Do not look to your own labors. Do not respect what your fingers have made. Look to God. God, in this rendering, looks a great deal like a small online fellowship that just decided it needs an office. Kitchen's trips were personally funded until God wanted square footage. God also wanted him to stop respecting the work of his own fingers at approximately the same moment those fingers were bringing in less work.
This is called faith.
The operation remains "small" and "very weak" compared with Herbert W. Armstrong, a comparison Kitchen loves to make. A response is building. Phone calls have come in from around the nation. He gets nervous imagining growth. God will provide what he needs to handle it. What he needs, at present, is for the Church to stand up in Jerusalem by standing up at the mailbox in Iowa.
People have asked the obvious question: if you can handle the tithe, are you ordained? Kitchen's answer is a masterpiece of remnant logic. No man ordained him. Therefore, he must already be ordained, because otherwise he would not have authority to handle the tithe, which he now has, which proves the ordination he does not claim. The Oregon Conference laid hands on Armstrong as a sign they recognized what Christ had already done. Perhaps the remnant can do the same by recognizing Kitchen. Perhaps he is going off the deep end. He allows the possibility for one sentence, then returns to the fruit test. Either he is a wicked tree or a good tree. The good tree accepts checks.
He has undergone severe health trials this year to get the point strengthened in his own mind. The point is: stop looking at side work. Start looking at the storehouse. The storehouse is his. The tares are everyone still sending money to the other ninety-nine continuations of the one true church. When tribulation hits, golden oil will flow. Until then, oil is expensive and so is an office.
Armstrong, Kitchen reminds the flock, was not ordained by a Sardis minister either. Christ ordained him. The church merely caught up. Kitchen is offering the same courtesy. You may lay hands on the arrangement by laying a tenth on the envelope. You may also ignore him and be laughed to scorn in the wrong direction. He is willing to be kicked for the elect's sake. The elect, if they are paying attention, will notice the kicking goes a lot easier when someone else is covering rent.
For over sixteen years the family received no tithes to fund this work. He himself labored to provide personal funding, because he believed in authorization. Now he has authorization. Now he is viewed as wicked. The timing is unfortunate only if you are still looking at the work of his fingers. God says don't. God says look to Him. Him, in the current fiscal year, has a building fund, a website, AI-assisted hymn demos, and a growing sense that the Philadelphia era cannot finish itself on window money.
Bring the tithes into the storehouse. Try Him now in this. See if He will not open the windows of heaven. The other windows have already been washed.
In Jesus Christ's name, and in the name of whoever is still holding the letter from the Philippines.
40 comments:
Panhandling is when a man asks strangers for money because work dried up.
If you want to offend a man asking for money, call him a "panhandler." Many of them deny that title. They're just "people asking for money."
Armstrong’s writings show he was ordained by Oregon Conference of the Church of God; that he accepted their authority.; used their credentials; and never claimed Christ ordained him. Kitchen has invented a myth claiming otherwise.
Remember that we are talking about the ACOGs. The squeegee isn't the only thing in the closet.
Anonymous person at 2:16 PM: Armstrong in later years did speak of being ordained by Christ. Elder Kietz Expressed great concern with that statement.
Evolution can explain why men have nipples. The bible cannot!
Herbert was baptized by a Baptist. Not by a CoG minister. Total fail! Would any CoG accept that as a legitimate baptism today?
Panhandling is what people do when they have spent all their government money on drugs and gambling. Did Jesus give money to such people?
Sam blocked me on Facebook last week for calling him a low rent grifter.
Health issues and now he can accept tithes. I wonder if there is a connection?
Apostle Matthew was a hated tax collector.
"Grifter" is a bit harsh. Sam was deprived of a proper education, having grown up in a cult within a cult (the Kitchen family). He is an obese man with serious health issues, yet his only semi-professional skill is window-washing. Considering his laziness and his family-cult-fed delusions, it's no surprise that he has developed his current mentality. His only alternative would be to admit that his cult and his family have bequeathed to him an empty life devoid of meaning and purpose, and have given him no skills to cope with it.
Anon at 9:14 pm Thursday:
There is a very serious report that Armstrong was rebaptized by CG7 Elder Stith in 1930. Armstrong would’ve covered it up so it’s not to look like he was a member of that church.
It puts them in a bad place. If somebody tries to make a point like you do about his Baptist baptism, they can’t dredge up the 1930 baptism without admitting that Armstrong was a member of CG7. That opens up a whole can of fraud in other ways.
When washing is actually a reasonably lucrative endeavor. A lot of companies don’t want to do it themselves, so they will hire people who can do it. It actually has a bit of skill to it. Plus, for Sabbatarian it permits them to work Sundays, and late at night.
I actually had the field suggested to me by a friend in my congregation, actually near that area where he is. It was actually suggested I try to apprentice with that family.
The financial difficulties have been a long time coming. I remember he got a part-time job as a fry cook. Then on Facebook, he complained about something or other on the job. I think he just had difficulty being a regular employee, rather than being the owner and self-operator.
As for there being connection between his health and his willingness to take tithe money, it would be sort of like how Armstrong got older and sicker, and loosened up some of the restrictions on medical care. They could both play it as God using circumstances to make reality clear. Of course, it’s really just self-serving.
Men having nipples, supports the idea that Adam was originally a hermaphrodite. That is, he was able to reproduce on his own. Then, for some reason, God got the right idea that like the animals, humans should be split between rational creatures and women. So the “rib – the term mean “chamber“ – was removed from Adam and put into a different body. Because that body would be just stating and ultimately, most directly caring for child, that body also developed memory glands. Meanwhile, the male body retained nipples as a vestige.
Believe it or not, I had to study into this over 20 years ago when I was still a Bible believer. It actually helped open my eyes to a lot of things about scripture. It sounds like an explain-away. Maybe it is. But that was a lesson I learned. You can never be sure exactly what something in scripture means, at least not to the level of divine certainty. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t an answer in there.
My nipple post is in response to the anonymous post 9:12 PM Thursday.
Slapped so hard, you don’t even remember your name.
The more discussions we have about Armstrongism the more I realize the extent of what cannot be known. And, that is one of the benefits cults falsely dangle to attract members: The ability to know the unknowable. The "We have all the answers" mentality.
In the end, nobody human does. Upon death, we become gnostic. Or not.
LW said: “There is a very serious report that Armstrong was rebaptized by CG7 Elder Stith in 1930.”
I’d be interested to see the evidence for that specific claim, because the evidence I’ve found does not establish it.
Armstrong wrote to A. N. Dugger on May 8, 1929—contemporaneously—that while Stith was in Oregon he “would not be baptized again by Bro. Stith,” and that pressure was being put on him to be baptized “all over again.” That seems difficult to reconcile with a rebaptism by Stith in 1930.
There is later testimony from Alice Henion, recorded by Rex Sexton in the early 1980s, that Stith baptized Armstrong when she was 13. I wouldn't dismiss that recollection, but it is retrospective and, importantly, does not establish 1930 as the date. What is documented is Stith's involvement with Armstrong during this period and Armstrong's subsequent ordination by the Oregon Conference of the Church of God in 1931.
So it seems possible that later recollections may have conflated Stith's involvement in Armstrong's early ministry and ordination with his baptism.
Unless there is a contemporary record showing that Stith baptized Armstrong in 1930, I think “Armstrong was rebaptized by Stith in 1930” is too strong. The contemporary evidence points much more clearly to Armstrong's 1927 baptism by a Baptist minister and his subsequent 1931 ordination into the CG7 ministry.
So has Samuel Chick-hen now collected enough tithes to buy the Ambassador Auditorium yet?
I'm having difficulty wrapping my mind around this Adam as an hermaphrodite theory. For one thing, recreational sex between these creatures would have been a horrible perversion of the laws later enumerated in Torah. But, also, we've often discussed fossils of the human-like creatures which predated mankind, apparently extending backwards 200,000 years. I am certain that if any of these creatures had been hermaphrodites, this information would have great prominence in today's climate.
I've also seen theories that in the tale of the fall of Adam and Eve, the serpent was a metaphor for a black man, who seduced Eve in the garden. It seems there is no shortage of speculative theories about that era in time, no matter how offbeat.
Regardless as to who might have exposed him to water, are we actually sure within reasonable probability that HWA's baptism took? There are all of those failed prophecies, hey hey, and the allegations concerning Dorothy! In a court of law, these constitute reasonable suspicion, after all.
Nobody claims that.
It’s eyewitness testimony which is corroborated. It is a quite detailed account. Sexton vouches for her clear personal state of mind. But he was an idiot who thought he was hearing about Armstrong’s known 1927 baptism. That’s why when he put it in his 2020 UCG article, it comes across as occurring about that time. I’m sure he got taken to the woodshed for his stupidity. As I’m sure, the idiots in the editorial department did for not catching it.
UCG could easily have simply said that the story turned out not to be credible. Instead, they purged the article and its online versions of it, and did deceptive editing. They know it’s true.
Here is a photo of the hardcopy version:
https://www.friendsofsabbath.org/ABC/Pioneers&Researchers/HL%20Hoeh%20papers/Remembering%20%20Humble%20Beginnings,%20United%20News,%20May-June%202020.pdf
Armstrong said that people were complaining about his non-Sabbatarian minister baptism. And yet in 1931 he’s getting ordained. CG7 was not the same tyranny as R/WCG. If people were that upset about it, the ordination would not have happened.
Armstrong was a liar. A worthless piece of dog poop and a liar. He had to cover up his CG7 baptism so he could use baptism to hold WCG members.
The poster at 11:15 PM Friday who won’t give his name knows all of this. Thus, he is desperate to try to cover up the reality. He is welcome to contact me on TruthSocial at @LTWalker03 if he wishes to challenge my characterization. He wouldn’t last five minutes in a serious discussion.
Unnamed poster at 9:24 AM Saturday:
There would be no “recreational sex“ if the hermaphrodite form had been retained. Think with your big head instead of your little head.
As for the fossil record, for this to be serious, you have to either be a younger creationist who ignores all of that, or a gap theorist who sees a totally new “human” happening several thousand years ago. Again, think.
As for other alternative theories, the one you mentioned is immaterial to the discussion.
Friday at 10:59 PM — Nobody can know to divine certainty anything that doesn’t come directly to that person from the Divine. That’s why all scriptures and prophets and signs and wonders are invalid as such. If God wants us to know something, he needs to tell us directly. “Best Evidence Rule” – You don’t use a deposition when the witness is available. And God can appear anytime he wants.
Pertinent part of the UCG article (original version) linked to previous post spilling the beans on the 1930 baptism. It says earlier that the witness was 13 years old at the time. That checks out with 1930. 1930 was also the year the Oregon conference Inc., meaning they were going to be having their own ministers soon. Armstrong obviously got baptized so that he would be eligible for a paying gig.
—-
…the account of Mr. Armstrong's baptism as told by Alice Henion. She was 13 years old at the
time but said she could recall it as
"clearly as yesterday:"
"Elder Stith, from Idaho, was here for six weeks of nightly meetings. The Armstrongs were staying in Salem with his parents, but came down here for every meeting. Mr. Armstrong and Elder Stith were engaged in intense conversation for a long time after each meeting, sometimes for over an hour. After about three weeks of the meetings had gone by, Elder Stith baptized Mr. Armstrong after one of the meetings. There was a wide place in Dever Creek that we used for baptisms and the entire group would go to watch and pray for the new one." Her account has been verified by her son, David Henion, who still lives in Jefferson, and a granddaughter of Elder Stith who lived in Spokane, Washington
in the late 1980s.
—-
Doesn’t sound like a conflating. Sounds like a detailed rendition of events in their context. It even has a location having nothing to do with a certain Baptist Church.
The truth is, this fits exactly with all of the known surrounding facts. The only thing that stands in the way of people believing it is that a certain perverted child molester insists he was never a member of a church of which he was clearly a member. Thus, their only evidence against this is a lie he maintained.
https://www.friendsofsabbath.org/ABC/Pioneers&Researchers/HL%20Hoeh%20papers/Remembering%20%20Humble%20Beginnings,%20United%20News,%20May-June%202020.pdf
Thats what I don't like about you, Lee! You try to impose all your shitty rules on our comments. Any chance you were once an Armstrongite minister? You surely have that damnable controlling personality.
Just one more thing about the 1930 baptism: I’ve contacted Hinson Memorial Baptist Church. That is supposedly where Armstrong was baptized in 1927. They have no records of the event. So a lack of documentation for a 1930 baptism by somewhat less established church should not be surprising.
The real question is whether there is exculpatory evidence demonstrating that he was NOT baptized in 1930. Refusal a year or so before does not take into account the three weeks of nightly Bible study and discussion with Elder Stith. Consider how WCG ministers could talk long time Christians– even Sabbatarians – into being rebaptized, simply because they came into the “true church.” Remember that Dugger had his meeting with the Ethiopian prince and Elder St. Clair nine years before and had already been pushing his “True Church“ theory a few years. (Remember also Armstrong’s claim to have done a search for the “true church” back in 1927, and having found CG7.) We can’t know for sure, but perhaps Stith impressed upon Armstrong that the minister baptizing did indeed matter, or that by being rebaptized, he would demonstrate his commitment to his new church, opening the way for possible ministry once the incorporation was complete. Armstrong would later be caught between the proverbial rock and hard place, and have to adopt his strange dual view that the one baptizing doesn’t matter, but at the same time virtually always compel a rebaptism.
Add in the financial incentive for a scheming scoundrel like Armstrong, and his desire for status among people – in this case, the congregation – and it would be a little bit shocking if he never was rebaptized. Elder Kietz, who was involved in approving the credentialing, testified that he had no idea about the Baptist baptism until years later. Sounds like potential fraud by Armstrong if the story is not true.
There is no evidence beyond his own testifying of himself that he was never a member of the church that ordained him, a church which says it would not have ordained him had he not been a member. (Though indeed, that would not rule out the rebaptism. As with the alleged Baptist baptism, dunking and membership are not necessarily mutually inclusive, at least not in the mind of a child molester.) There is however, testimony from somebody much more trustworthy – that is, somebody who is not him – that it did happen.
“ I think “Armstrong was rebaptized by Stith in 1930” is too strong.”
It just occurred to me, this sounds a lot like an AI response. Those systems are geared to be positive toward the user. So if a pro Armstrong person were to put this information into an AI, I can see this kind of thing being spit out. But an AI doesn’t understand the character of a child molester like Armstrong. It also hasn’t seen so many other things which have been written about his rebaptism.
I use AI. It is very useful for forcing me to stay In line with my available information. I even argue with them! 😁. No problem with my opponent using it. But it genuinely looks like he was so desperate for a response that they just copy and pasted what a sympathetic AI told him.
Credit to the AI, though, for finding the scrubbed UCG article.
I stand ready to be proven wrong on that.
I demand the false accusations about my innocent children are removed from the recent Kitchen article.
Do children have no protection on this blog ???
I will not stop protesting until it is removed.
You need to go take your meds, sweetheart! No wonder your kids are so rebellious.
Anonymous at 2:16 PM Thursday: In later years, Armstrong would make statements about being baptized or ordained by Christ or God or something like that. Elder Kietz would express concern about just what was going on in his head.
Just realized I made that statement. Sorry about the repeat.
Finally looked at what Sammy wrote. As resident expert on Armstrong ordination succession, what he is apparently done is ignore the early versions of the autobiography and go with a 1973 in 1986 versions which omit any reference to ministry being at Armstrong‘s ordination. It’s just a bunch of people in those later versions. Hence statement that Armstrong was not ordained by a “Sardis minister.” So he is trying to apply that to himself.
People might remember that It was correspondence with him that was used as the basis for my extensive article on the succession claim. I could tell from certain things he said that he picked up on what I had sent him in order to twist it, but now it has forced him to effectively reject the entire true church claim. Without succession, ANYBODY could at any times spontaneously become a minister. He elevated himself by destroying the chain on which his church is based.
Link to his write up: https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=122316867242064998&id=61551949941641
Link to my ever-expanding succession debunking: https://catsgunsandnationalsecurity.blogspot.com/2025/03/reference-to-followers-of-armstrongism.html?m=1ReplyDelete
Posted this on the Sammy’s Facebook page linked to above. I just don’t have the heart to let them go on making a fool out of himself in the eyes of his great god Armstrong:
“I know this probably won’t be allowed to be visible, but that’s OK. It’s just something you should know.
You seem to be using the 1973 or 1986 versions of Armstrong’s autobiography, which omit any reference to ministry being at his ordination ceremony. However, the original version that was printed in PT, and it’s 1967 codification Actually say that SDA minister Taylor and “one or two other ministers“ were there, and laid hands on him before the rest of the assembled people did. He also says in an article in 1960, reprinted in 1979, that he was ordained by the laying on his hands of the “Presbytery.” https://www.hwalibrary.com/cgi-bin/get/hwa.cgi?action=getmagazine&InfoID=1396016167&SearchWhat=KeyWord&SearchFor=Ordained%20by%20hand%20man&NoShow=&page=&return=search
I’m sure we won’t agree why he excised any reference of ministry from the account. But the truth is, according to him at the beginning, there were ministry there. Maybe he was lying then. Maybe he was lying later. But it is something you need to consider.
The reality is, if you throw out the need for such succession of LOOH, you are in effect nullifying the “one True Church.” Anyone could claim to be some sort of “spontaneous“ minister, such as you are here. And if you are honest, you can’t know whether their claim is valid until after it has had a chance to bear whatever fruit it will bear. The whole idea of the “true church” is based on that apostolic succession. Without it, “Worldwide Church of God“ is just a denominational name.”
Hate to break this to you, 4:60, but if you called me
names on my Facebook page, I'd block your ox, ass, manservant and maidservant, too!
Lee Walker 12:04, 12:28, 1:10, 6:53, 1:03, 12:55, 7:16
I'm not trying to defend Armstrong or prove you wrong mate; I'm simply trying to determine what the evidence actually shows.
It seems to me that, either way, the baptism issue raises serious questions about HWA’s credibility.
If you’re wrong about the Stith baptism and HWA was only baptized by the Baptist minister in 1927, that still highlights what I already know about HWA’s inconsistency on baptism and LOOH. He rejected CG7 rebaptism when Stith was urging it, yet later built an entire ministry in which rebaptism and LOOH became major issues.
If you’re right that Stith baptized HWA around 1930, the problem is even more serious. HWA repeatedly presented his 1927 Baptist baptism as his only baptism and, as far as we know, never acknowledged a subsequent CG7 baptism. If he knew it happened and deliberately concealed it, that’d make the charge of deception considerably more serious.
So either way, I don't see this as evidence that strengthens HWA’s credibility whatsoever.
Where I remain cautious is simply this: I think the Henion testimony is serious evidence for a Stith baptism, but IDK if we can yet say that a 1930 baptism is conclusively established. That's why I asked for the evidence—not because I'm trying to defend HWA, but because I want to know what actually happened.
If the evidence eventually establishes that HWA was rebaptized by Stith and concealed it, I'll have no problem saying so. As I said it’d only add to all the evidence that already points to HWA’s dubious character.
As for your AI comment: I use ChatGPT simply as a writing aid. I formulate my own thoughts and conclusions, then use AI to help make it more clear. Then I edit the result myself. The ideas and position are mine. AI’s just helping me express them more clearly. I don’t see anything inherently wrong or deceptive about that.
I certainly didn’t try to strengthen Armstrong‘s credibility.
As for the certainty of the 1930 baptism report, what reason do you have to doubt it? Armstrong’s credibility and five bucks might get you something at Starbucks. The only testimony of his ever pushed against the claim is that he says errantly – probably deliberately falsely – that he was not a CG7 Member. He demonstrably was a member, and the baptism would cancel out his use of virtually the same gambit for our/WCG.
And when you add in the possibility that he somehow arranged to be CG7 Baptized in order to keep the local Congregational peons happy, but not be taken as a “member“ – remember he did that with the Baptist baptism – then there was even less reason to disbelieve the report.
It happened.
If this went into court, It would be somewhat similar to his molestation of his daughter. Those saying it happened would most definitely win the civil case, easily, but the criminal case, possibly not. I will say that the baptism claim is much more strongly established than the molestation claim.
And since most people here believe he did indeed rape his daughter, the majority view here should be that the 1930 baptism happened.
What I care about is not necessarily who baptized HWA, or how many times he was baptized, but whether it actually took! His prophecies failed and his empire disintegrated, and noboby's been able to revive it or unite it. That tells me everything I need to know about him. If you bet your life on him, you have overwhelming odds against you!
Anonymous soul at 2:48 PM The crucial point, and the reason his followers try to cover up the 1930 baptism, is that he used the baseless claim that once a Christian is a “member” of a particular organized “church,“ they are basically stuck there forever. They can’t change denominations. The whole idea is of course to keep questioning members still attending. “Well, I have issues with WCG, but God says I have to stay here.“ If it had been known that he had actually submitted to the requested baptism, and that he was subsequently a member of CG7, Armstrong would have to be seen as doing exactly what he and his ministers were telling members they could not do. It would’ve ruined that particular hole then they would’ve left and taken more healthy paths in life. And Armstrong, but not have been nearly as “successful” in earthly terms.
It has to do with the fraud. Exposing this fraud might help reach some of his followers and make them realize what have been put over on them. This would weaken the control of the cult. It might still believe many of the same doctrines, but it would be from their own studies and convictions, not from this belief that Armstrong was Elijah or something. Not everybody would take this tack, but it would help some.
As for whether his dunking “took,” even within the Christian faith that is really between him and God, not you. Don’t worry about his situation, but rather worry about your own. Armstrongism Is about such judgment. It’s about trying to delineate who is and who ain’t. It’s about that violation of Romans 14:4. You don’t need to stay in that course. Hate the man for what he did, judge any given doctrine on his own merits, and let God determine his fate.
Post a Comment