article submitted by SHT
The Duplicity and Double Standard of Herbert Armstrong was prevalent in the life of Herbert Armstrong and his subjects in the Church. To illustrate the example of Herbert's "It's OK for me, but not for you" standards, allow me to illustrate two examples.
The first example I wish to bring forth is Herbert's divorce from Ramona back in the early 1980s. Herbert went through quite the ordeal with his short marriage with Ramona. But it was not unlike the many divorces that were not permitted in the church by others who had much of the same common situations as Herbert.
Let's look at the culmination of the marital struggles with Herbert's acknowledgement of the situation to the brethren from a Co-Worker letter that was sent to the church.
EXAMPLE 1: Divorce.
But with deepest regret I have to say to you now, Mrs. Ramona Armstrong has refused to be at my side here in Pasadena headquarters or in further travel, but has insisted on living separately in Tucson. It has been determined by events, facts and fruits that I am not spiritually bound by God and only by man's law of this world. Circumstances now render it ill-advised that I condone the continuation of the legal marriage, both from the Church point of view and of my own. It was my hope and effort to resolve the matter, and with the least publicity possible, for the benefit of the Church, for her and for myself. All attempts to do so have failed. It has therefore become necessary that I accede to the advice of Church legal counsel and file the necessary legal proceedings. I assure you every effort has been made, at cost of heavy stress on me personally, to avoid this.
God HATES divorce. So do I. I have gone to every effort to prevent this. It would be inappropriate at this time that I state all the facts, but if necessary and proper later, I will reveal more.
This matter of marriage and divorce has been of very serious concern to the Church, and to me personally. I had never known of a divorce in my own family as far back as I have record or knowledge. I lived 50 years with the wife of my youth — happily. I have made every effort to avoid this action that I hate. You may be sure, of course, that it is not taken except after every effort, continuous heartrending prayer, and completely in accordance with God's Word and teaching, and the teaching of God's Church, especially I Corinthians 7:12-lS.
This determination SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A PRECEDENT TO ENCOURAGE OR JUSTIFY OTHER DIVORCES IN THE CHURCH.
With this example, Herbert's marriage to Ramona was deemed as "not spiritually bound by God". However. It is clear that if the exact same situations were to occur in marriages within the Church, then this decision "should not be used as a precedent...to justify other divorces". That's the definition of a double standard right there. It's ok for "me", but if you end up in the same situation, to you, it's sin.
I used the word "sin" because if someone goes against the minister and does it anyway, then it's rebellion against Government, rebellion against Church doctrine, and could get you in "trouble" for divorcing anyway if you were "advised" not to.
Thirdly, if it is completely in accordance with God's Words and teaching, then why is it not precedent?
Let's now look at the second example on baptism.
Herbert Armstrong was baptized in a Baptist Church. Herbert says that through that baptism, he received God's Holy Spirit.
Let's keep in mind that Herbert Armstrong regarded Baptist Churches as deceived, satanic, and cut-off from God. This, and of course, all other protestant, catholic - even Seventh-Day and Jehovah's Witnesses included in this mass judgement. Yet he, Herbert's baptism was deemed valid. But the official teachings of the Church taught differently:
EXAMPLE 2: Baptism
However, notice that the one performing the baptism ceremony was a representative (though not necessarily an ordained minister) of the true Church of God in every New Testament case. This was the Church Jesus founded (Matthew 16:18).(All About Water Baptism)
If this was true, then Herbert was the very first exception to the rule, wasn't he? No Baptist minister was a representative of what Herbert considered an ordained minister of the true Church of God.
Yes, SATAN HAS SUBSTITUTED A FALSE CHRIST AND DIABOLICAL CUSTOMS. THOSE WHO OBSERVE THESE PAGAN CUSTOMS AND REJECT THE TEACHING OF CHRIST SHOW BY THEIR ACTION THAT THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT SALVATION REALLY IS! Satan has substituted a false baptism — a mechanical act which does not signify the burying of the old self. He has perverted the teaching of God that man must repent. - C Paul Meredith, Counterfeit Baptism Today
Here, the argument is made that Satan has substituted a "false Christ" by those who "Observe these pagan customs".
There can be no argument made that the Baptist Church is most certainly classified as one of the churches that Herbert would regard himself as a church that "observes pagan customs". Therefore, by the Church's standard, Herbert was baptized in what the church taught, and what he considered a pagan church with a false baptism - especially since the Baptizer was not representative of "the true church of God".
After baptism in a worldly church, such people don't immediately begin to study and UNDERSTAND the Bible. They just continue to go along with the customs, the ways and the traditions of their friends and of this world. Their lives are not actually CHANGED. They don't come to personally KNOW GOD! Such people have NOT TRULY REPENTED, and their baptism was probably not valid! Their's was only a ritualistic "dunking" in the water. If you are wondering about your baptism, ask yourself WHY you were baptized in the first place. Were you baptized simply because many of the members of your family were baptized, and you felt looked down upon, or had that "left out" feeling? Did you stand in the water and go through the ordinance of baptism simply to "join" the group with whom you had been fellowshipping? Were you baptized because you temporarily thought it was the "right thing to do?" If you were baptized for ANY of these reasons — YOUR BAPTISM WAS PROBABLY NOT A VALID BAPTISM,
The only reason in this missive why they had to add the word "probably" was because they were well aware of the fact Herbert was baptized in just such a church. Yet, because the belief was Herbert was the only one who understood, changed, and repented, his was deemed valid. However. I can find no example of any other person who was baptized in a "worldly church" who's baptism was deemed valid - except Herbert Armstrong.
Yet, what was said to those with questions from the staff of the Plain Truth (ministry) who had been baptized into a worldly church?
You need to really repent and be baptized into Christ by a true servant of God in order to receive the Holy Spirit and be added to the body of Christ — the true Church (I Cor. 12:13).- Plain Truth Staff (The Bible Answers Short Questions From Our Readers)
Which goes back to what was quoted earlier - they according to the Church, there has never been an example where the baptism ceremony was not conducted by a representative of "the true church".
Except Herbert Armstrong, the first one to do so by being baptized in a Baptist Church by a Baptist Minister.
By the Church's own doctrine, then, Herbert should have been judged to have been baptized by what he considered and taught as a false, satanic, pagan church, breaking the entire baptismal succession of true ministers in the true church baptism according to the New Testament, and received a "false christ" in a "false baptism".
Of course, since it's Herbert's Church, he was the exception to the rule, just like with the divorce from Ramona.
This didn't stop just with these two examples. There have been many documented examples of the same duplicity in many other examples. So what was a person to do if they caught Herbert doing something that he told everyone else not to do?
Say nothing, turn around, support Herbert Armstrong, and above all - tread carefully.
Could this be why the current crop of Splinter Leaders think they can get away with so much? Because Herbert did it, and since Herbert did it, it must be okay? Following Herbert Armstrong as an example is a sure way to go down the road of wickedness and corruption. An idolatrous and hellish way to go - a rotten way and an attitude that Jesus himself warned repeatedly against.
