Gerald Weston: If You Go Against His "authoritative judgement" are "you doing so at your own peril?"

 

Why do COG leaders have the incessant need to CONTINUALLY threaten members? Scripture is filled with stories of Jesus and other faithful people breaking bread or associating with prostitutes, lepers, menstruating women, eunuchs, tax collectors, and other undesirables or "unclean" people. What we also see is Jesus CONSTANTLY pointing out the evils of CHURCH LEADERS and how they bind people up with absurd and offensive teachings, doctrines, and constant threats of losing one's salvation.

Geerald Weston has a problem with ANYONE questioning his leadership.

COGNews had this up:

...the Sabbath service on August 8th, streamed live to all congregations – sermonette from Wallace Smith and sermon from Gerald Weston – was devoted to explaining why church members are required to obey all leadership decisions, and therefore comply with the new (temporary) normal in hymn singing, i.e. “for those of you at home, you will be singing along, and those at services will be contemplating and humming along as we can.”

Gerald Weston referred to Wallace Smith’s sermonette, noting, “these were not decisions made by lay members, but by duly ordained leaders and judges that God had placed in a position of authoritative judgement. We have a situation today where people are saying, well, if I can’t sing, I’m not going to go where the church has placed its name for the feast. We’re just going to have our own feast. Did God ordain you with the responsibility to decide where Christ is going to place His name? If you do that, you are doing so at your own peril.”

LCG: Wally Smith's verbal contortions on our obligation to submit to "substantial people in the church"

 

From an LCG source:

An Overlooked Aspect of Faith. Wally Smith, Living Church of God. Sermonette transcript. Aug. 8, 2020

Thank you very much, Mr. Ruddlesden. Howdy everyone, I hope that you are doing well. It's a privilege to be able to be connected with technology and all the goodness that is provided in our age today. I want to ask a question here at the very beginning. What is faith? And people define it in many different ways. Actually, I did a search online to find a way some outside of the faith define faith and it wasn't actually all that encouraging. We've understood for some time. Actually, Mr. Herbert Armstrong said it very well, and we continue that idea is that faith is believing what God says in his word. That faith is actually reading the words and recognizing God does exactly what he says he will do. God does fulfill the promises we see there and that God does work in the world and in the church exactly as he describes in this book. Believing that to the core of your being is faith. So, with that that in mind I have an often overlooked aspect of faith that I want to discuss here at the beginning of the sermon. I'm sorry beginning of the message. Do we have faith in, do we have trust in, do we believe in Jesus Christ when he tells us in his word and records plainly how he governs in his church? Because if those things are recorded in the Bible and we read those things in the Bible, but we do not take Christ at his word if we do not believe those things, then we lack faith. Faith isn't open to us to define and determine however we want. It's defined by God in this way. Do we actually believe what Jesus Christ says when he describes how he governs his church? And so that we're going to take a look at today. 

We're going to take a look at just a few verses that discuss how Jesus Christ himself from God's mouth to our ears through these papers, how he himself says he governs in his church. So we can ask ourselves if we believe Jesus Christ and have that faith, or whether we don't. My title today is An Overlooked Aspect of Faith. Now the verses and passages about this topic are many in the Bible. In fact, it might take a little bit of faith for some of those in the audience today to wonder if Wally Smith can give us sermonette-sized message. So I'm sure they're all praying right now, I hope that you are too. We're just going to focus on a few and definitely not take a look at all of them. Let's start in Deuteronomy Chapter 17. You probably have your Bibles with you, 'cause you're in God's Church, Deuteronomy, Chapter 17. And Deuteronomy Chapter 17, we're going to see beginning in verse 8, that God understood that disputes come up that disagreements come up, not because, say, one person is evil and one person’s not but legitimate attempts to understand how to apply his word and what to do. And did he abandon us to chaos in that regard. Absolutely, he did not. In Deuteronomy Chapter 17 and verse 8. Starting there, we read, “if a matter arises which is too hard for you to judge between degrees of guilt for bloodshed, between one judgment or another, or between one punishment or another, matters of controversy within your gates, then you shall arise an go up to the place which the eternal your God chooses, and you shall come to the priests, the Levites and to the judge there in those days, and inquire of them. They shall pronounce upon you the sentence of judgment.” It’s plain, he didn't allow this to just swim amongst the people. It certainly wasn't a democracy of any sort. He said, "I have appointed people. I am going to take care of you. I'm your God who loves you and I am going to ensure you do have a body of people that you can go to and discuss these things and hear from them what his judgment is and he takes it seriously." Take a look at verse 10, “You shall do according to the sentence which they pronounce upon you in that place which the eternal chooses. And you shall be careful to do according to all that they order you according to the sentence of the law in which they instruct you according to the judgement which they tell you, you shall do. You shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left from the sentence which they pronounce upon you. Now the man who acts presumptuously and will not heed the priest who stands to minister there before the Eternal your God, or the judge, that man shall die. So, you shall put away the evil. From Israel.” And it says, “that all the people shall hear and fear and no longer act presumptuously.” This was something that was meant to keep the people unified. It wasn't just about whatever particular circumstance came before the appointed judges sitting in the place of authority that God had placed, it was meant to have an effect on everyone so that everyone continues to work together in peace. 

Now, it might be easy to say, well, what does God actually want though? But he literally says. Do we actually have the faith to read what he says? In fact, if we were to ask ourselves how is it God would run his church? How is it God would want his church to be run in to be governed and for decisions to be made? If we haven't taught ourselves by now, that this is how we figure that out we go to this book and we ask him, he gives us the answers, though it does take faith to believe them. Now, thankfully at least in the Church of God, most of us wouldn't say this, but there are those out there in the world that might say, well, that's the Old Testament. You know? What about the New Testament? We see this repeated in the New Testament as well. Turn to Matthew, Chapter 16. Again, there should be no doubt God is speaking here of his design in these things. These are not words that are being made up by human beings. This is in the inspired word of God. Just like when you're trying to figure out how marriage is supposed to work, and I know a lot of us sometimes wonder how is this supposed to work? The answer to that is to look in his word and see how God describes this is how marriage works. “I designed it. Do you trust me or not?” When you're that wife - and now I've known a lot of wives that don't have perfect husbands like my wife does, and it's difficult sometimes. Sometimes your husband, maybe I have as well, makes a decision that you're pretty sure is kind of a boneheaded decision. You think about that and you think, “Honey, I don't know; there's something about that that just doesn't look right,” and you do your best to convince him and he's like, “I don't know, honey, I thought about it and you know I think we've got enough bananas to pull that off,” and I have no idea what that would be, but regardless, you know he's looking at and thinks we can do it. And I actually did have a faithful wife in the church days ago. I think she was just talking about her experience as a wife. And she said that she's found If she goes against God's small government, it still God's government in the family and tries to undercut her husband, try to make things work out her way, God doesn't bless that, even when she's right. But when she learns like Sarah did with Abraham in his moments of weakness, where he was worried about dying, though God had given him promises. If she yields and supports her husband then sometimes he makes it work out when it shouldn't. Sometimes he does help the husband see a year or two later. “Boy, honey, I'm really sorry that was dumb,” and sometimes he helps her see that she was wrong. But it works when we do it God's way in the Bible makes it plain what God's way is. So we see, because Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever, we see that in Hebrews 13, Jesus Christ is consistent. The God of the Old Testament reigned through his people as he himself described in the Old Testament, and he reigns through his people today as he describes here, and it is the same.

We see in Matthew Chapter 16, where he's actually talking about the creation of the church and starting in verse 18. He says, “I also say to you that you are Peter, verse 18, and on this rock, I will build my church and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” Now we don't need be distracted by the difficult scripture aspect of this. We understand that he was the small rock, Peter was, and Jesus Christ was the big rock. The point is he's building his church and he's speaking to his leaders. And what does he say to them? He makes the same assurance that he made to the leaders of Israel. Read the next verse. Verse 19, “and I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. And whatever you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth will be loosed in heaven.” Now let's understand. Does that mean that somehow people can decide? Well, here's what we bind on Earth: Sunday instead of Saturday. God is a Trinity. And no, that's not the same thing. Deuteronomy taught us. These were matters of trying to figure out how to apply the law, not how to discard the law, not how to jettison the law and replace it with nothing but human Pagan concepts. These were legitimate matters of how to apply the law, and let's be honest, if we have any kind of relationships with substantial people in the church and we talk about God’s things here and there, which hopefully we do, it's a wonderful thing to do on the Sabbath. We do not always agree, right? But someone has to make the call from time to time and Jesus Christ makes it plain who does. Now, it's important to understand there's other translations like the New American Standard Bible translation translates that as what you bind here on Earth shall have been bound in heaven. What you loose here on Earth shall have been loosed in heaven. It’s the same principle we see in the Old Testament, it’s the same principle we see in second Chronicles chapter 19, where God talks about being with the judges. In their judgment. It's Jesus Christ promising his church, “I really am the same yesterday, today and forever.” It's Jesus Christ, saying, “you can have faith in me and I do reign consistently among my people.” It's Jesus Christ saying that “just like there was a council of elders meeting in Acts chapter 15, in which I worked with my people through a contentious issue to come to my conclusion. I do not change and I work through a council of elders in the 21st century as well.” And I must say it's a privilege to be able to do that and to see Mario Hernandez’s smiling face, “Hello my friend,” you know, and everybody's his friend. And to see Mr. Ames sitting there like a rock so faithful and to reflect on these promises and to know that those promises are still true. You know, brethren, we are in a time in this world that is one of the most divisive and fracturing that I have ever seen. I'm 50 years old. I know some you think that's really young and some you think you must be almost dead. 50 years old in my whole life I have never seen times like this. The world is fracturing and people are being filled with division and hate. And Satan the devil smiles at the opportunity that he may have to inject some of that inside the body of Christ and the Church of God. Brethren let's not make him happy. Let's believe and have faith in Jesus Christ. Satan may want to do that, but we don't have to let him. And if we have faith. We won't.

LCG Wallace Smith: If Your Husband Tells You to Lie It Is Ok Because You Are Following Government

 

The gist of Smith's argument as I understood it when I listened to it was that Sarah was right to go along with Abram's lie to Pharaoh about their relationship because God's will in the home is for the wife to be submissive to her husband and that if she doesn't support him even if he is wrong, it won't work well because she is not submitting to how God designed His government to work in the home. In The case of Sarah it was argued that God worked it out anyway, and that it is up to God to make the husband realize it if he is wrong. He then launched into the argument for binding and loosing, and equated Weston and the LCG "Council of Elders" with the "Council of Elders" that met in the book of Acts, implying that the LCG council is the one God is working through in the twenty first century.  

I have numerous issues with this approach. First of all Smith is cherry picking examples that he thinks fit his argument and ignoring others. As I mentioned in the other comment I made, Abigail did not go along with Nabal and did exactly what Smith says a wife should not do. In fact she went out without his knowledge and took provisions to David and his men, while Nabal got drunk and partied at home. She didn't inform him of what she had done until the next morning. As a result Abigail and her household were spared from being slaughtered in David's wrath, Nabal fell over dead within ten days, and Abigail then became one of David's wives. So my question is, was Abigail correct in this instance to circumvent her husband's wishes, or should she have just meekly submitted to him even when the servants came and warned her that there was going to be trouble as a result of Nabal's arrogance and foolishness? 

Another issue is the idea that LCG's leadership and council are equivalent to the "council" who met in Acts, and they have a right to bind and loose decisions on how to apply God's law for the rest of the church. If the "church" consists of the entire assembly of believers, and these believers are scattered among numerous groups with different councils and different shepherds, what makes Smith think the decisions of his council carry the same gravity as the group of people who met in Acts? The Apostle Paul didn't even give the meeting in Acts as much weight as Smith gives his council. A reading of Galatians 2:1-10 demonstrates this point. I could also add that reading the rest of the chapter would demonstrate that Paul did not view Cephas or Peter as some pope figure who was above criticism or reproach with the power to bind and loose, even if he was wrong. Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrate this point. 

If we cherry pick scriptures that only fit the scenario we want to promote, this is not gleaning the whole truth of God's word, and can be misleading, because we have left out part of the story. It also isn't honest, which goes to Smith's argument about Sarah. Is it okay to go along with a lie if your husband tells you to, and if so, will God always work things out in your favor, or will you suffer the consequences along with your husband? The story of Ananias and Sapphira might be instructive here. Acts 5:1-11 

Concerned Sister

LCG Not Guilty of Recreating HWA In Their Own Image?

Wallace Smith (LCG) has  a beef with those in various splinter cults that "recreate" Herbert Armstrong to fit the image they seek to portray even to the point of adding their own words to HWA's comments.  I find it kind of hypocritical for LCG be saying such a thing considering the fact on how they worship and exalt all things related to HWA.  HWA has been recreated to fit the mold of LCG and it's doctrinal viewpoints.

Recreating Herbert W Armstrong in their own image

Click on link above to read entire article 

 

One thing I appreciate about the Living Church of God — and something that I do not find anyplace else I have looked — is an effective dedication to the Bible above all else and to the proper respect for the teachings and work of Herbert W Armstrong.

Yet, our (very appropriate) love and fondness for Mr. Armstrong, a man we rightly believe to have been a modern day apostle, is used by many to turn some away from the truth — and even from what he, himself, taught — in subtle, deceptive ways. They do this by recreating Herbert W Armstrong in their own image.

Many do this these days. Tellingly, they do not agree with each other. I remember driving down Central Expressway once in Dallas (actually, it could have been the 635 loop–it’s been a while!) and almost running off the road when I saw a giant billboard with Mr. Armstrong’s face on it. I actually exited the highway, looped around, and got back on to look at it again. It was an advertisement for some sort of public presentation by one of the many “pretenders to the throne” (“graspers of the mantle”?) out there claiming to stand for what Mr. Armstrong preached and taught and claiming that a man who can no longer speak for himself would completely endorse what the pretender had to say.

This fellow is not alone. Many like to parade an image of Mr. Armstrong and claim his posthumous endorsement. Logically they cannot all be right, given how much they despise and disagree each other, yet logically they can all be wrong. The latter would be the case. (Some reading this may disagree. “Well, welcome to my blog,” he says, with emphasis on the word “my.”)

What they do is recreate Mr. Armstrong in their own image. They tend to take the things he said that they wish to emphasize and highlight those things (often with a great deal of bluster and chest thumping), while they tend to diminish, minimize, or explain away those things he said that clearly disagree with their personal doctrinal obsession or their justification for self-promotion. They do this in a variety of ways.

Another way they deceive those who love Herbert W Armstrong and recreate him in their own image is to “enhance” his own words with their own personal commentary. I’ve seen at least one hilarious version of this taken to a ridiculous extreme, in which an incredibly clear statement made by Mr. Armstrong concerning the fullness of the gospel’s content is twisted by inserting the deceptive teacher’s own words and explanation into Mr. Armstrong’s words so as to make Mr. Armstrong’s original writing incoherent. Even today, more than 25 years after his death, Herbert Armstrong remains one of the clearest writers I have ever read — there’s a reason he called his magazine the Plain Truth! Yet this one deceptive “augmented” quote I have in mind would have us believe the man couldn’t put two sentences together without our needing him to explain why the two sentences are self-contradictory. Unbelievable. (And, frankly, a sign of how desperate and self-deceived some people can be.)