The One Fact About British Israelism That The COG's Refuse To Consider

A CGI Response to the Bill Watson Article

A CGI Response to the Bill Watson Article

By

Lonnie C. Hendrix

“I believe you misunderstand the reasons CGI is known for being ‘relatively moderate.’ The CGI differs from some (but not all) of the other groups in that it emphasizes servant leadership rather than some hierarchical form of polity, does not believe it is ‘above’ the other groups spiritually (it's members do not claim to be the ‘Philadelphia church’ or the ‘spearhead’ of the Work of God), does not have leaders claiming to be apostles or prophets, and doesn't use near-date-setting or claims about being in the ‘gun lap’ of the ‘final phase of God's Work’ to get people to send more money.” - See more here

So the CGI’s claim to moderation rests on its emphasis of the servant leadership model? So there is no one in the CGI telling everyone what to believe or controlling what everyone says and does? Then how do you explain another quote from the same response to my article?

“When someone from another organization is invited to speak in Tyler, if that person has views that differ in some way from the CGI's doctrinal positions or are considered controversial within CGI circles, he is asked not to bring them up. If he does bring them up, he will not be invited to come back to speak again. Further, the degree and nature of other CoG groups' differences with the CGI is an important factor in determining whether and how the CGI will participate in joint-activities with them. If you think CGI folks will "accept any belief that comes down the pike," just ask Lonnie about that. After he went public with his views on sexual issues, the CGI stopped using his material in its publications.” - See more here

Sure sounds like more of the same to me:  Unity imposed from above – We MUST all speak the same thing! No room for different views here. If you disagree, hit the road! And, if you don’t claim to be superior to the other groups, why should anyone want to choose you over one of them?

“But the CGI's theological positions are spelled out in no-uncertain terms in its Systematic Theology Project. Its official position on homosexual behavior is in agreement with the official position of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches as well as a very large number of Evangelical churches and theologians: homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity and are intrinsically disordered.” - See more here

Funny, in addition to being in agreement with the teachings of the Catholic, Orthodox and most Evangelical churches, the CGI finds itself in complete agreement with Herbert Armstrong’s God Speaks Out on the New Morality. Since they claim to regard all of those other groups as heretics, isn’t it funny that they would agree with them on this point? I guess Satan hasn’t succeeded in deceiving those folks on this one?

By the way, am I the only one who noticed that nothing was said in this response about the doctrine of British Israelism? If a dubious claim to an attachment to servant leadership is your only claim to independence from Armstrongism, then you may wish to rethink your responses to the thesis of my article?

Best Description of David C Pack Ever

...David C. Pack is in no way Joshua, 

or any other figure from the Bible, 

not a prophet, 

not an apostle. 

At best, he is a 

marked, 

defrocked, 

and 

disfellowshipped ex-pastor, 

frequently disciplined 

for his abusive treatment of the church members 

in the areas in which he served, 

and also for his continued refusal to accept authority.

...David C. Pack has financially ruined a large percentage of the people who were once part of his church. As a marketer of fear and authoritarianism, he has also caused mental disorders such as depression and paranoia. The RCG is known to radically worsen the life conditions of anyone who chooses to align themselves with and commit to that organization. Byker Bob