Former WCG Member Hosting 10 Part Series On Heaven's Gate Cult

Hollywood Reporter has the following story up:

The 10-episode project, which will explore what led to one of the largest mass suicides in U.S. history, will be hosted by Glynn Washington.

Dan Taberski is reuniting with the team behind Missing Richard Simmons for a new podcast that will explore what happened inside the Heaven's Gate cult. 

The Missing Richard Simmons host is joining Heaven's Gate as a writer. The 10-episode project will be hosted by Glynn Washington of Snap Judgment.

Washington told The Hollywood Reporter that the podcast won't just focus on the mass suicide of Heaven's Gate members; it will also delve into the lives of the people who joined the group and seek to answer questions about how the suicide happened.

Washington spoke to family members, survivors and other people involved with Heaven's Gate for the project. "These people are real people who made real choices for real reasons, and we wanted to explore that," he said. 

Washington explained that his interest in the topic comes from his own background growing up in a cult (his family was a part of a religious organization called the Worldwide Church of God). "The lens through which the project is viewed is my own," he said. "I can't do this without bringing my own background to these questions."

Washington said that Taberski was an important addition to the team. "He's got a great touch as a writer," he added. "Bringing Dan on is a demonstration of how much excitement [there is] about this project and the commitment to making sure that it works." 

Heaven's Gate hails from Stitcher, which is a part of E.W. Scripps' Midroll Media podcasting division, and is being produced in collaboration with Pineapple Street Media. It is set to premiere Oct. 18. The trailer can be listened to here. 

Constance: The Wannabe Prophetess to the Church of God

Through the decades the Church of God has been in existence (Armstrong era) there have been literally hundreds and hundreds of self-appointed prophets who have claimed to be the modern-day conduit of God's hidden prophetic knowledge. Almost all of them have been men.  Men usually without much education other than spending far too many hours immersed in Armstrongism. These men would take the words of HWA and others and create scenarios that would frighten God so much that he would delay the tribulation.

On occasion, there have been a few women who have claimed the status of being a prophetess.  They never gained much ground in the church because the men would immediately dismiss them with one simple verse:

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak;

Or, from the Message Bible:

1 Corinthians 14:34-36The Message (MSG)

34-36 Wives must not disrupt worship, talking when they should be listening, asking questions that could more appropriately be asked of their husbands at home. God’s Book of the law guides our manners and customs here. Wives have no license to use the time of worship for unwarranted speaking. Do you—both women and men—imagine that you’re a sacred oracle determining what’s right and wrong? Do you think everything revolves around you? 

Some would still persist and gain a few people who would listen to them, but they mostly fall upon deaf ears.

Once more, we have another prophetess who seeks to rise up and proclaim a message of doom and gloom to a church that is lacking in zeal.  This modern-day prophetess is none other than Constance, the sidekick to James Malm, the Official Church of God Pharisee.

Prophetess Constance has written an entry on James Malm Blog of Zealotry where she seeks to defend her prophetic status.  Her holiness writes who many in the COG today do not look towards women to be speaking.

In some circles, there is the theological belief that women must be silent and are not permitted to teach men ever. We will look at the two often quoted passages that some use to substantiate this teaching. How do we rightly divide these verses which make up the Word of God? And how to we reconcile them with so many other verses in the Bible that quite plainly say that women are to speak and teach others biblical truth and to encourage all the brethren, whether they are male or female?

These two places in the Bible seem to be saying that it is not permitted for women to teach because they then would be teaching men. It is from these verses that many mainstream Christian theologians derive their position that God forbids women from being teachers in the church. Even though some of the large corporate COG groups are now allowing women to write articles for woman’s magazines and blogs, there are a few elders and church members who still hold this position in the COG’s as well, among both men and women. The apostle Paul is the author of these two oft quoted passages that at first glance appear to be forbidding women from ever teaching; this is what he wrote:

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Nothing new in the above comments, as this has been standard COG teaching.  However, like any good acolyte of James Malm, she has a better understanding than the blithering Laodiceans in the various COG's who are lacking in truth and zeal.

She writes:

If taken out of the context of which it is written it may appear that these verses are telling the women of the Ekklesia that they are not permitted to teach, period. Also that it is a shame for women to even speak in the church. In order to rightly divide the word of truth, we can ask some questions in regard to what this is actually saying and look to Scripture for the correct application of these verses. We should not take these verses out of the context of the whole message that Paul is trying to convey in these passages, but instead seek to understand exactly what he was referring to. We must put all Scriptures together if we want to know the truth about a particular subject and the Bible clearly tells us in other places that women are to “prophesy” in the church. It helps us to understand if we know that the definition for “prophesy” is another word for “to teach, refute, reprove, admonish, and comfort.” 

Apparently, the only people who take things out of context when quoting the Bible is everyone one except for the reigning prophets, prophetesses and church leaders.  That has been the standard practice of the church for eighty-some years.

That does not stop Constance though.  She is so sure of her prophetess status that she has to look for other scriptures that can support her desires. She twists the word prophecy to fit what she is doing on Zealot Malm's site where she has become his mouthpiece on several issues while his health sufferers.

Let’s begin by addressing the “to be in silence” part. If women are to be silent and are not permitted to speak or teach, how do we explain the numerous other passages of Scripture that seem to imply that women are exhorted to prophesy; which simply means to speak, to teach, reprove, admonish, proclaim, comfort and edify the church? In Joel, the prophet foretells that at a certain time in the future, that both men and women would be prophesying.

Joel 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, [latter days] that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:

Constance then goes on to say that when the Holy Spirit descended on those gathered at Pentecost that the men and women became prophets and prophetesses.

On the day of Pentecost in 31 AD when the Holy Spirit manifested itself in the form of cloven tongues of fire, Luke the author of Acts, says that all who were present were filled with the Holy Spirit and all began to speak with other tongues (foreign languages). We can assume that there were both men and women disciples present. This does not say, just the men, but all began to speak. Peter quoted this very verse from Joel 2 to explain what was happening which clearly says that in the last days the sons, the daughters, and handmaidens shall prophesy. 

Pharisee Malm has been using Constance to write "Chicken Soup for the Soul" style letters to his followers to make them feel all warm and fuzzy as the exclusive brethren of Malm's god after he has scared the crapola out of them with his end-time orgy of hellfire fury.

1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. [prophēteuēte] 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

In verse 3 Paul states “he who prophesies speaketh” and goes on to define in what way this person is to speak; namely to edify, exhort and comfort.  To “speak” is the exact opposite of being silent. This verse does not have a clause excluding women from edifying the Ekklesia. Men and women who prophesy will speak. How and what will they speak? This verse tells us that to “prophesy” will be words spoken that edify, exhort, and comfort others. He repeats in verse 4 that “he that prophesieth edifieth the church”. That is to whom we direct our prophesying primarily, to our brothers and sisters in the Ekklesia. Paul exhorts all, which includes both men and women, to prophesy which means to edify, exhort, and comfort one another.

Constance has been searching for many years trying to find a place she could hang her hat and be recognized.  Going from one Sunday keeping church to another and then with a foray into Wicca, the prophetess found James Malm's zealotry to her liking.  After being spurned by other churches, she now can put her talents to use for Malm as a teacher who reproves, refutes, admonishes and comfort Malm's  aging flock. By interpreting it as she has below, she now has a place alongside Malm, whom she believes is a prophet.

“Prophesy” can also be translated as: teaches, refutes, reproves, admonishes, or comforts (Thayer’s Greek Lexicon). When “prophesy” is used in 1st Corinthians 11 and 14 it is translated as “teaches, refutes, reproves, admonishes, or comforts”; it is not meaning here in this passage to foretell future events.

One of Malm's cultish teachings is that all women who are tied to his personality cult must have their heads covered when they are in church or in prayer, much like Yisrayl Hawkins commands all of his women to do.

We also note again that in 1st Corinthians 11:5 Paul teaches about head coverings in conjunction with a woman prophesying.

1 Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

Constance then expounds more as to why she should have prophetess status by using Paul's words to justify her rantings.  Constance was meant to prophecy, Paul says so!

If the apostle Paul forbids women from prophesying (speaking, teaching and edifying) why would he say a woman must wear a head covering when she prays and prophesies? It does not make sense that Paul would say this if he had in other epistles told women they could not prophesy [speak or teach] as per what some teach 1st Timothy 2:11 forbids.

Therefore if a woman is commanded (as per Paul states in 1st Corinthians 11:5 and 1st Corinthians 14:1-4) to edify the church, that means she will have to “speak” words of edification in order to do so. But if she is on the other hand not permitted to speak or teach, how can she remain silent and edify at the same time? Does this make sense and is this possible? No, of course it does not make sense and needs further exploration, for the Bible does not contradict itself. The same apostle Paul who admonishes women to prophesy in 1st Corinthians 11:5 and in 1st Corinthians 14:1-4 meaning to edify the church, is the same apostle that wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in 1st Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1st Timothy 2:11-15.

Constance, for some hair brained reason, imagines herself

If women are never to teach men then why was Priscilla permitted to help in expounding “the way of God more perfectly” to Apollos who needed more instruction in how to teach others himself. To expound is the same as to “teach” and Priscilla in this instance was used by God to help teach a man. 

The Greek word for “expound” is ektithémi: (Strong’s #1620) and means to set forth, figuratively to declare. (Strong’s Concordance)

When Priscilla and her husband Aquila heard Apollos speak in the synagogue, they took him aside and showed him what he needed to be teaching about Jesus, the Messiah. Apollos must have been very teachable for after they instructed him, God was able to use him in an even more powerful way in publicly proclaiming the Gospel to convince the Jews that Jesus was the Christ. There is no hint whatsoever by the writer of Acts that Priscilla had overstepped her bounds by not remaining silent; but rather Luke goes on to write of the fruit of her teaching Apollos along side of her husband. 

The Bible states emphatically without exception that both men and women are to prophesy, teach and preach God’s word and speak to the church words of edification, exhortation, comfort, and building others up by encouraging and strengthening them.

Constance is setting the terms of her reign as a prophetess in the church. Malm has been using her for a while now to write words of edification, exhortation, comfort, and slick words to make Malm's followers believe they are being strengthened.

The meaning of “prophesy” has the same meaning, whether it is referring to a man prophesying or to a woman prophesying. This kind of prophesying or teaching was predicted in Joel 2:28, and then quoted by Peter in Acts 2:17; that God would pour out His spirit upon all flesh, and that His sons and His daughters would prophesy.

God’s faithful know that the Bible does not contradict itself. So how do we explain the verses that state that women must be silent in the church when comparing them to other verses that exhort women to prophesy, to edify and encourage? We know that the Bible does not contradict itself, and God is not the author of confusion and that includes this subject of women teaching. The gifts of the Holy Spirit were given to both men and women for the edification of the body (with no gender qualifications).

So just how does Constance get around being able to teach men? All of the scriptures she quotes tells her that she is not teach men in worship situations, but what about elsewhere?  That elsewhere is how she gives herself permission to teach and prophecy OUTSIDE worship services.  Websites, letters, articles, etc. are her happy mediums by which to teach men.

Just as he addressed maintaining order when church members come together in 1st Corinthians 14, here, again, he instructs the brethren about proper authority roles in the church when it comes to formal church services. A woman is permitted to prophesy as per the other verses we looked at, but she is not to usurp authority over men as God has decreed in other places in the Bible when doing so. Paul is referring to the authority of a man over his wife that God has ordained when he goes on to talk about Adam and Eve and the order of things. A woman can prophesy or teach in other venues but she is not to speak or teach as an authoritative speaker in formal church services. God is telling us in these Scriptures that He has assigned the leadership role to men; to fathers and to husbands.

The Malmites have instituted the same forms of worship that Ysraeyl Hawkins group uses for their cult worship.  Men with lifted "holy" hands and women covering their heads with scarves.

In his instructions about how to conduct worship services, Paul tells the men how to pray (without anger or disputing, lifting up holy hands), and the women, how to adorn themselves (not being overly concerned about fine fancy clothing but being clothed with good works), and from this he moves to the topic of the prohibiting of women from teaching or usurping authority over a man.

The subject of authority is also mentioned in chapter 11 of 1st Corinthians which instructs the manner in which women are to pray and prophesy with head coverings; but then also goes on to explain that the head coverings represent the authority roles between men and women. In the following passages Paul goes into more detail about men and women roles which reiterates what he taught in 1st Timothy 2 and 1st Corinthians 14.

The command that women are not to teach in the two controversial passages cannot be taken as an absolute command that “no woman should ever teach a man” for if that were true, Paul would have rebuked Priscilla for having a part in instructing and teaching Apollos. The words “usurp authority over” provide us the key to understanding this passage. Women should not be permitted the role of authoritative leadership in the church and is supported by the verses that follow: “to ask their husbands” in 1st Corinthians 14 which is referencing back to Adam being formed first, and then Eve, who was created second and as a helpmate for Adam. After the first couple’s disobedience to God by taking of the forbidden fruit, Eve, who represents all the women that would come after her, was told that her husband was to be in authority over her. This is what is being referred to in verses 1st Timothy 2:11-15.

Constance continues to dance around and make excuses for why she needs to be considered a prophetess who can teach men.

Women are not to hold positions of authority or become pastors or give sermons in formal church services because God has decreed that it is the responsibility of men to exercise the leadership role, and women are not to take that responsibility away from them. We are not advocating, at all, the ordination of women or that women should be allowed to become pastors or church leaders or to get up front and speak or give sermons at formal worship services.

Paul, in all of these verses, is focusing on the fact that women are forbidden to take leadership roles in the Ekklesia over men which is very much in tune with the subject of the correct line of authority within the home and family system. Christ is the head of the man, and the man is the head of his wife, their children being subject to both their parents. It is a matter of church government within the family as designed by God.

“This issue is much misunderstood. It is all about  legitimate godly family structure and is not meant as a slight against women.  Women are not to preach in the church service, because it would be unseemly for a lady to be exercising authority over the husband that she vowed before God to obey.” (Women’s Role in the Church – James Malm)

God intends, most certainly, that women are to worship Him along with the males at formal assemblies. God desires that women sing hymns during services, and talk to others, fellowshipping before and after services; she just must not do so as one having the position of leadership in the congregation. This understanding is in complete agreement with Paul’s discussion in 1st Corinthians 11, a chapter that demonstrates that women did participate in prayer and prophecy in the early church. 

We can draw obvious conclusions then from all of these Scriptures; that women can certainly teach and declare the works of God by exercising their gift of prophecy. In Titus the older women are specifically commanded to teach the younger women and the children; Paul even describes what they are to teach. The older women are to teach the younger women, among other things, the proper order of headship in the home and how to love their husbands and their children. 

Can you imagine sitting there having Constance teach you how things should be!  That is just as horrific as listening to James Malm squeal about being zealous and worshipping at the feet of Moses.

Neither one of these two prophets of Moses need to be preaching at or teaching anyone. Bastardizing the Bible and church history to fit their own perverted message is not worthy of being heard.  No man in his right mind would let Constance teach him anything.  Especially a woman who dabbled in Wicca after being asked to leave several evangelical Christian churches.

Armstrongism has produced many crazy people over the decades and unfortunately, it continues to this day. While the church may certainly have many women who are actually qualified in teaching, Constance is not one of them  Let the buyer beware!

Prophecy Fails--Don't Live For It

One of the hallmark traits of most Fundamentalist Christians is their obsession with Bible Prophecy. Prophecy has a rather mystical draw to it and implies that the future is not so unknowable after all. Most humans spend their waking time either in the past feeling angry or in speculation of the future feeling anxious. It goes with not having the ability to live the real day one is currently experience. Many Christians have raised knowing the future to an art form and have learned that it is also quit profitable for the church in keeping members in line with fear, anxiety and a perverse kind of hope.
Bible prophecy and making it the center of one's life, reading the newspaper as one would the Bible, is a slippery slope and a very negative way to live one's life.

With enough study, one can learn that there are other explanations for that which many hold so near and dear as predictions of things that will happen "shortly" in the future. No one seems to think that "shortly" for whoever really wrote Revelation has now been over Two Thousand Years! I hate to think what "I'll be back later" would mean!

We have learned to develop the bad habit of reading Paul's predications of "time is short" with the same generous deference to the fact that short for Paul never really quite worked out for him either. We all know the cycle Paul went through of telling the Church to be ready, act as if you had no family and support the Church, to his final realization that "oh well, I fought a good fight, it was fun while it lasted, I was wrong... I still win... see ya."

On the other hand, we have areas of scripture that have always been used as prophecy which, to me, are simply not and never were intended to be by the original authors.

Isaiah 7 is an example of such a use of OT scripture by NT authors. This virgin birth prophecy ranks as one of the most questionable uses of scripture Matthew used to tell his story of Jesus birth. Matthew had a habit of mining the OT for anything that seemed like it fit the story he wanted to tell about Jesus. When one examines the OT context, we have to conclude that, that at least in it's original meaning, it was never meant to have the meaning Matthew assigned it. In fact, in its original context, it has absolutely nothing to do with prophecy but is merely a historical account of events going on at the time. It was never viewed as a prophecy of the birth circumstances of either the Jewish Messiah or Jesus until Matthew mined it for it's story telling value to his perspective. Matthew took the parts that fit his story but left out parts of that same story in Isaiah that obviously made no sense to his perspective on Jesus. If you simply look at Matthew's accounts of Jesus birth story, it is easy to see he cobbled it together in the style of the day from OT scriptures and not real events that he knew of. It is not my point to explain all this here, and I have touched on it in past columns.

Another aspect of "prophecy" we miss is that much of what the COGs use to promote their urgency upon the membership is probably prophecy written after the fact, which makes it really non-prophecy.

Either the book of Daniel was written during the time of the events recorded, 585 BC, or as many scholars now feel, it was written much later in the 160's BC to encourage the Maccabeans in their revolt against Rome. It was written AFTER all the events prophesied took place, which is why Daniel 11 is so specific. Daniel 12 then becomes rather generic because after the rise of Rome, the authors didn't really know the rest of the story much after the specifics of the 160's ended.

The point is that we all know that OUR lives were lived, and many still live their lives out, linking Daniel to Matthew 24, which also was written to address issues now long past from our times.

Again it is not my purpose to prove that to you, but I have accepted that much of what we call history prophesied is really "prophecy" historicized, or the conforming of later writings to fit events as they had already occurred. If the detail of Daniel 11 is the kind of thing that is able to be locked in stone for future fulfillment, then we as humans have no choice in the part we have to play in the game as it is already decided for us evidently down to the details. It's a philosophical problem to me about choices and free will.

Modern Tyre

Took a licking-Kept on Ticking

Other problem with prophecy is that they simply didn't come true. We all were groomed with the fantastic story of the fall of Tyre and how it would be scraped bare never to be inhabited etc. The problem is it wasn't and the city of Tyre existed in NT times and does to this day. The Tyranians rebuffed Nebuchadnezzar and only succumbed to Alexander the Great, yet still exists. It's a cop out to point out ancient ruins in the water as proof of prophecy fulfilled when the city called Tyre is just over your shoulder. These facts are easily found in a simple search on the topic.

Ezekiel's Failed Prophecies on Tyre and Egypt are examples.

Ezekiel made a prophecy that, at the time he wrote, seems most likely to be fulfilled. The prophet was writing, in 587 BC, at the time when Nebuchadnezzar was laying siege on Tyre. With such a powerful army like Nebuchadnezzar's, it was not surprising that Ezekiel prophesied the fall of Tyre to the Babylonian king.

Ezekiel 26:7-14: For thus says the Lord: "Behold I will bring upon Tyre from the north Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, and with horsemen and a hosts of many soldiers. He will slay with the sword your daughters on the mainland; he will set up a siege wall against you. He will direct the shock of his battering rams against your walls, and with his axes he will break down your towers...With the hoofs of his horses he will trample all your streets; he will slay your people with the sword and your mighty pillar will fall to the ground...they will break down your walls and destroy your pleasant houses... I will make you a bare rock...you shall never be rebuilt, for I have spoken," says the Lord God.

The whole passage clearly prophesied the sack and complete destruction of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar. However, the vivid description of the sack and fall of Tyre never happened. After a siege of thirteen years, until 573 BC, Nebuchadnezzar lifted his siege on Tyre and had to arrive at a compromised agreement. Thus Nebuchadnezzar did not destroy Tyre. Tyre was destroyed by Alexander the Great, 240 years later. And furthermore, despite the prophet, the city of Tyre was eventually rebuilt.
When Nebuchadnezzar broke the gates down he found the city almost empty. The majority of the people had moved by ship to an island about one half mile off the coast and fortified the city there. The mainland city was destroyed in 573, but the city of Tyre on the island remained a powerful city for several hundred years.

The implication of this paragraph is clear: that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed a major portion of Tyre. Tyre's main city was always on the island. The part of the city on the mainland is nothing more than a suburb. In other words, Nebuchadnezzar could achieve no more than take over a relatively minor part of the city. Furthermore it is obvious from the passage in Ezekiel that the complete destruction of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar was prophesized. Ezekiel himself admitted that this prophecy was a mistake!

Ezekiel 29:17-20: ...the Lord God came to me: "Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon made his army labor hard against Tyre; every head was made bald and every shoulder was rubbed bare; yet neither he nor his army got anything from Tyre to pay for the labor that he had performed against it... (Website: Rejection of Pascal's Wager)

The prophecies of both Isaiah and Ezekiel against Egypt also fell far short of reality in their "fulfillment."

"The prophet Isaiah, for instance, foretold the drying up of all the waters of the Egypt, and the destruction of all land used for plantation due to this drying up of the River Nile.
Isaiah 19:5-7: And the waters of the Nile will be dried up, and the river will be parched and dry; and its canal will become foul, and the branches of Egypt's Nile will diminish and dry up, reeds and rushes will rot away. There will be bare places by the Nile, on the brink of the Nile, and all that is sown by the Nile will dry up, be driven away, and be no more.

This part of Isaiah, widely accepted by scholars to be written around the eighth century BC, is about 2750 years old. And in all this period of two and three quarters millennia, this prophecy has yet to be fulfilled! Moreover it is clear from the context that Isaiah prophecy was meant for the Egypt of his time. For it was with that Egypt that Isaiah and his people had a grievance against, and the prophecy was a warning to them. Obviously this is a clear example of an unfulfilled prophecy." (Website: Rejection of Pascal's Wager)

I only point these out because so many would NEVER entertain the idea that any prophecy of the Bible didn't come true and will launch any number and kind of apologetic to defend what was said would be from what really occurred in history. Some of you are doing that right now.. :)

And now we again live in a time where "prophecy" can manipulate real lives. There are any number of those who just know how it will all be. The kings of all directions are doing this and that..."just read my article and see for yourself." Every world news event , like in the 60's or 70's or 80's, is worthy of note. The last Pope would be the last Pope and now this Pope will be the last Pope and I expect the next Pope will also be the last Pope. Meanwhile we get older but not the wiser for the experience. What we'll end up with is drawing every imagined prophetic event to ourselves in reality as some government leaders even seem to base policy on "what the Bible says." It is very possible to cause things to happen because one expects them to happen. The problem is you end up with all the damage and none of the salvation. In short, an end of the world scenario can be acted out based on false subconscious beliefs and yet still you end up with no Second Coming, World Tomorrow or Kingdom of God. You end up screwed up.

So why might it be better not to LIVE your actual life around the alleged reality and truth of prophecy and the "imminent" return of Jesus which has been imminent now for a couple thousand years?

I've been there, I've done this. I've lived my real life ahead of my actual life while it quietly slipped by. I've made life decisions in the past based on a preoccupation with the future. I've also let a lot of precious life time go by thinking about things that proved to be untrue and teaching things that weren't. I thought they were, but when one realizes they aren't, it would be hoped one would stop that. I did.

I've been there, I've done this. I've lived my real life ahead of my actual life while it quietly slipped by. I've made life decisions in the past based on a preoccupation with the future. I've also let a lot of precious life time go by thinking about things that proved to be untrue and teaching things that weren't.

Basing a life on what may or may not happen in the future, and Bible types did it all the time and were wrong too, is to miss the present. And whether one admits it or not , the present is all we ever actually really have to work with. Your kids really are their ages they are NOW and one does not postpone making memories with them now because the future is a more serious consideration. They will NEVER again be kids, and you and I will never again be any younger.

For Paul, to live might be loss and to die gain, but that theological rhetoric and let's face it, Paul never, from what we can note, ever had to enjoy his children, mate or life in the now. He was in the imminent future right up until it bit him in the bum. He may have had the power to have a wife, great word there, "power", but I bet he was basically not one the women would flock to to begin with.

If you are still in a COG, does your Sabbath experience, weekends that your kids also have to call their free time, only consist for them of coming, sitting and going? How often we forget that the parents generally got to make their life decisions but then deny them to their children. I know, "raise up your child in the way he should go.." Problem I have is with the "should go."

I used to take my kids to the local zoo on Sabbaths after church. This was in the 1970's. I have never regretted spending MANY a Friday night with them when little swimming at the YMCA and stopping at Dunkin Donuts on the way home. That ritual of the "now" is far more remembered than any sermon I may have given that day. But for some, depending on their prophecy laden pastor, life is just one big "around the corner", "just a little longer" and never ending "gun lap." I had kidded for years that we have been in the gun lap so often, we run the risk of running out of bullets. Little did I know that was a prophecy that would come true!

Prophecy means NOTHING to me at this point in my life. It may mean a lot to some of you depending on who is feeding the need to know what I don't think we can know in this world. We can hide behind the idea that we know God is doing this or that, but that's pretty iffy knowing.

Whatever your position, at least know that even the Bible got it wrong at times, not matter what your pastor says or how your church motivates you with prophecy to live on the edge of your chair, just a bit ahead of the now, in somewhat a fearful or at least anxious, "what's going to happen" state. Isaiah was wrong, Ezekiel was wrong, Paul was wrong and yes, even Jesus was mistaken in his own perceptions of his own experience. That's another story.

If we can be wise enough to see that even Bible prophecies indeed have failed, that some prophecies are not really prophecies , and that reading the newspaper as if it were the Bible come to life is not wise, we might actually have a life in the now we can say was a real life. A life lived in anticipation of some alleged future is not a real life. It's disillusionment in the making.

I'm going to go out on my own limb of prophecy here. I predict that all the leaders of any COG who promote prophecy first and have not really ever given a sermon using the ideas in this article, will live out their lives and come to the same conclusions Paul did. They kept a Faith and now it's time to pass on.

I predict that Churches like PCG and RCG will pass from the scene when their me only leadership does. One can only get so much mileage out of playing the sermons on world events by those who died years ago. Yet I guess we do that when repeating Paul's admonitions of the shortness of time forgetting it is long since past when he felt it would end. We do it when we say "Behold I come quickly" when that quickly was over 2000 years ago.

I predict that WCG  will become a meaningless footnote to the Christian experience. I mean why belong to something in California that is everywhere you live? What holds scattered groups together is being special and having special insights into "The Middle East, What Next." And "Will You Be in the Place of Safety." Don't get me started!

I predict more people will avail themselves of the Internet to do their own studies and come to their own conclusions. I always had to ask a pastor because somehow I thought he must know. After all, he was an "expert" on the Bible. Now you can ask lots of pastors and scholars and even those who used to be and no longer can abide it.

 I predict the era of Guru's will end for those who learn to think and search a matter out from many and not just one source. I would hope that people in congregations dominated by one grand idea spoken by one grand human being will finally wake up and not care if asking a question or questioning a sermon or concept gets them kicked out. Being kicked out, terminated, fired, marginalized or blocked at the door can be the greatest freedom you'll ever experience if you ever choose to reclaim your own brain and perspectives. Remember...ANY TIME you are listening to another human being tell you how it is, and your get that little "uh oh" in the tummy....listen to it! It's the truth trying to have a chat with you.

I predict many will keep on believing the unbelievable because that's what humans do to keep fear and uncertainty at bay. I do it, you do it.

Don't live in anticipation of possible future. We can't know and no one has ever gotten it right. All prophecies about the Second Coming of Jesus have failed to date 100% ! Don't miss your NOW for that idea that just around the corner, me and mine will be justified in forgetting to enjoy the one life we know we NOW have on this planet. It's a dangerous world to be sure, this does not mean it is the result of prophets who themselves missed their own marks way back

A life based on Prophecy as interpreted by someone who thinks they know and enforced upon one as fact , just wait and see, is going to be a stressed one at best. You are also going to have to give up a few bucks hard earned to keep the mythology and the grand poopa in prediction mode. Remember there is Addiction to Predictions. Don't allow yourself to wake up decades older with grown kids having regrets you didn't go to the zoo, go for a Friday night family swim or stop at Dunkin Donuts in their jammies on the way home....even on the Sabbath.  No God or Angel is taking names.