Dave Pack: Mind the Gap

 

Mind The Gap

 

David C. Pack of The Restored Church of God was experiencing the cold sweats of withdrawals from not speaking. I have been monitoring him closely since Part 353 in March of 2022. The longest he has gone without the soothing limelight bathing him in rapturous glory has been thirteen days.

 

Flashback Part 418 – February 9, 2023

@ 01:48 But, I love words. They are (I guess) my heroin.

 

Boy. He was not kidding. He was more correct than he knew.

 

In the past seventeen months, David C. Pack has not gone longer than thirteen days without speaking.

 

I thought he was going to break his record this month, but alas, it was not meant to be. His itching teeth were too much to bear because “The Greatest Unending Story! (Part 463)” was given on August 19, 2023. The Gap Clock was reset. The ringing in his ears was abated.

 

The gap in speaking creates a ripple effect of gaps in reporting. The Opening Night of the Feast of Tabernacles on September 29 at sunset is still when Jesus Christ will return. Subject to change, and change will be the subject soon.*

 

 

Since it has come up in private messages and in the comments section, the reason there have been no new articles is two-fold. After almost two weeks of blissful silence, Part 463 was plain boring. Dave repackaged some old material he had forgotten and stamped it with an "I wish I knew that sooner" label. Nothing was pressing to report.

 

The other side is that I have been busy. I let the comfortable silence marinade.

 

Dennis Diehl gave me some sage advice early on, "Don't write unless you have something to say." The website is an information hub with timely, relevant news reporting. It is not entertainment. Since there is no internal pressure to produce content to gain followers or generate income, when Dave is silent, I can follow suit.

 

There are over 200 other articles on exrcg.org for people to catch up with if they discover the website. The Feast countdown clock keeps ticking on the landing page. And Former Sixth King Mister Vladimir Putin still needs someone else to start his car in the morning.

 

When significant changes are announced, you will read it here.

 

 

Within the first sixty seconds of Part 463, it was clear Dave planned to perform a stealth rebranding of The Kingdom to Israel.

 

Part 463 – August 19, 2023

@ 00:37 So, we’re gonna ask this question: When is the Initial Kingdom of God? When is the Initial Kingdom of God? And maybe even what is it? What is (when is) what is the Initial Kingdom of God? The Bible talks about three measures.

 

@ 01:33 But we’ve gotta look at how the Scriptures say the Initial Kingdom of God looks.

 

Dave plays a shell game with words. He preps the church for a new timeline but does not reveal it in Part 463. By introducing the new phrase "Initial Kingdom of God," he can save face by manipulating language for when he later shifts the First Kingdom timeline or adds back in a fourth iteration. Flip a coin to figure out which.

 

@ 25:16 I never did the exercise we’re about to culminate with. Never did it. I wish I had. It would have made things a lot simpler.

 

Drum roll. This must be something nobody has ever heard before.

 

@ 26:34 “…to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.” Wow. So, every time Christ came back in the other Gospels and, He's preaching the Kingdom of God. Luke is telling us He’s preaching the first year? Wow. The first year IS the Kingdom of God. Not in power in the same way, but it’s immensely powerful.

 

Some may think when I write about Dave suffering from the early onset of dementia or Alzheimer's, those are somehow stabs at dark humor. No. He must be losing his mind if he believes this is new material because he is presenting like this is a mind-blowing revelation of essential knowledge.

 

@ 28:02 So, we’re gonna look for the rest of the sermon at what it means to have this year that is the Kingdom of God.

 

@ 28:30 So, when is the Initial Kingdom of God? It is the year. Now, here’s what was so difficult. Can this also be restoring the kingdom to Israel? Oh, that’s been a bugaboo. You've heard me say, "You cannot have the Kingdom of God, and it's the Kingdom to Israel."

 

As it turns out, the Kingdom to Israel IS the Kingdom of God. Though, he never said that. Instead, he spent 25 minutes retreading verses to make a point that never culminates.

 

If this idea is so new, how come I already knew it?

 

Dave was the one who separated the Kingdom to Israel of Acts 1:6 from the Kingdom of God in the first place. Not the Bible. That concept was entirely his brain-baby, but he forgot he sired it.

 

This does not feel like Part 463 but rather Part 263. Nobody at Headquarters tapped Dave on the shoulder to replay all the sermons where he had already covered this type of content. It is not new material, folks. It is a remix of side points he swept into one bin to toss on the brethren as if it were game-changing confetti. David C. Pack is the Rip Taylor of bible prophecy.

 

 

@ 58:25 We're gonna come back soon. We’ve gotta consider exactly what is the Feast of Ingathering at the end of the year. Has the church fully understood this? Or might we find we’ve got it in the wrong place? And maybe our wait is not quite as long as we think it is. We’ll soon cover other very important things. Good night.”

 

By the end of the uninspired message, it was obvious Dave had not spent thirteen days studying the content for Part 463. This was a filler message to prepare the brethren for more changes to come.

 

Early reports on Part 464* last night confirm my hunches. Expect more Dave updates more frequently on the horizon. It appears the gap has been filled.

Marc Cebrian

See: Mind the Gap

Why we will not be “God as God is God” – Part 2

“And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them”.

From a post-resurrection appearance of Jesus. (Luke:43-44)

 

                               Why we will not be “God as God is God” – Part 2

Against the Armstrongist Doctrine of Becoming God

By Scout

“God then purposed to reproduce himself, through humans, made in his image and likeness…” - Herbert W. Armstrong, Mystery of the Ages, p. 94, 1985. 

“It cannot be repeated too often:  We were born for the express purpose of literally becoming equal with the creator of the universe — members in the same eternally ruling God Family-Kingdom. But what will we be like?  Like God!  Exactly! Exactly like God!”  - Robert L. Kuhn, “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

“Thus said the Lord, The King of Israel, their Redeemer, the Lord of Hosts, I am the first and the last, and there is no God but me…”  -  Isaiah 44:6, Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition.  

 

Part 1 is at: Why We will not be “God as God is God” – Part 1   

Section I (Continued): Ontological Differences between God and Resurrected Humans

Ontology refers to God’s eternal existential nature and essence. I believe this roughly corresponds to Robert L. Kuhn’s concept of being “qualitatively” like God. The question we seek to resolve is whether resurrected humans are ontologically the same as God. If resurrected humans are different from God ontologically, then the God-as-is-God trope fails. Below are some points at issue:

God is not constructed of parts and humans are: Humans are dependent on the functioning of internal body parts for life to be sustained. We are contingent on a beating heart. God does not have parts in his essence. He is not a composite. He is what Thomas Aquinas calls a simple being. A simple being is a free, necessary being. If God is reliant on eternal parts to sustain life, then he is not necessary. He is dependent on something and this means that he is not all powerful. And then there is the chicken and egg crisis. Did the necessary heart, if there were such, come first or did the necessary God come first? And then there is the origin question. Who designed and created the heart so God could have life? These are other similar questions must be resolved in order to support the theory that God has a composite body. 

 
Humans will have an embodied resurrection as Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 15. The implication of this, drawing on our human experience, is that we will be dependent on our bodies for the full experience of life. We might use the term “packaged” instead of embodied. Our sensory capabilities, for instance, will be packaged in our resurrection bodies. We will have seeing eyes. I doubt they will be there just for ornamentation. Maybe we will have super eyesight that we cannot now imagine but this sense will be implemented in our eyes. An embodied resurrection implies that our bodies will not be superfluous but will be an essential package of capabilities and attributes.

Jesus is fully God and fully man. He is God in essence but also has a body. We will have a body like his in the resurrection (Philippians 3:21). Jesus in his resurrected human manifestation ate fish with the disciples. This implies that his resurrection body had some internal parts that handled the processing of the fish like a human body, even though such processing might be very different from the processing we know. But Jesus, unlike us, is also fully God and so eating fish does not mean he is dependent on bodily functions such as food and a digesting stomach.

Further, if we are comprised of sarx (flesh), psuche (animating principle) and pneuma (spirit), as people in the time of Jesus believed, then our resurrected bodies will also be an assembly of parts. We will lose the perishable parts (sarx and psuche as the ancients believed) and these will be replaced by similar non-perishable parts in which the non-perishable pneuma (pneuma being our personality, consciousness, intellection and mentation) will be housed. At a minimum, in the resurrection humans will consist of two parts: resurrection body and pneuma. If God is not dependent on bodily parts and resurrected humans will be dependent on parts in their resurrected state, then resurrected humans will be ontologically different from God.

 
God alone is self-existent: God the Father is self-existent (John 5:26). Jesus in his pre-existent state as the Logos was self-existent (John 1:4). Jesus, fully God and fully man, in his present state is self-existent (John 5:26). Paul wrote, in Timothy 6:16, of God “Who only hath immortality (athanasia)”. The Persons of God are self-existent because they are uncreated. Humans will always possess a derivative and contingent existence because they are created (Col 1:16-17), whether in the flesh and blood state or the resurrected state. The uncreated God will create resurrected human beings but it stands to reason that he can also reverse the process and terminate resurrected human beings if he ever so willed. It is not logical that God could do something that he could not undo. This would violate his absoluteness. Because humans, even resurrected humans, have imparted life sustained by God rather than inherent, uncreated life, they are ontologically different from God.

Other issues could be considered. But for purposes of an elementary proof this should suffice. The upshot is that human beings in their resurrected state will substantially differ from God in ontology. And because the difference is in ontology, the very predicate of being, resurrected human beings will not be different from God in just degree but in category. Resurrected human beings will not be equal to God in any sense. They will be subordinate to God both ontologically and economically.

Section II: Our Participation in the Divine Economy

While resurrected humans are not going to share the ontology of God in the future, resurrected humans will share in the divine economy – what Kuhn refers to as being quantitatively like God. Resurrected humans will be immortal, not through self-existence, but through the faithful sustaining of God. Resurrected humans will be equipped for usefulness and servant leadership. And I expect God will delegate to resurrected humans work and responsibilities at a level that is appropriate. What resurrected humans do will be a finite and quantitative involvement and it will be spectacular, but it will not even remotely rise to the level of being God. Everything that God delegates to resurrected human beings will be something he could have done himself. Borrowing a concept from C.S. Lewis, God will give us the dignity of causation. He could do it all himself but he is going to let us participate.

Section III: Why Armstrongism Created the God-as-God-is-God Concept (God Reproducing Himself)

I don’t know.

Coda

God-as-God-is-God is something that even Armstrongists do not believe in without qualification. Robert L. Kuhn gave expanded definition to this topic back in the Seventies and stated that resurrected humans will have equality with God qualitatively (ontologically) but not quantitatively (in economy). It is actually the case that resurrected humans will be neither qualitatively nor quantitatively, in Kuhn’s parlance, equal to God. The equality term drops out of the equation. Resurrected humans will participate in the divine economy to a degree but will not be like God ontologically – like what he is in his existential nature. Resurrected humans will not be equal to God in the essence of his being but like him in the application of his energies – much scaled down. The God-as-God-is-God mantra should be replaced by simply referring to resurrected Christians as the “children of God” as the Bible most often does – partakers in but not full possessors of the Divine Nature. Being a child of God is not a bad future.

 
Afterword

I believe Armstrongists are unique among those who profess to believe in the God of the Bible in that to assert that God is actually much greater than what HWA thought him to be makes them angry. They seem to want to believe in a limited God who is nothing more than a more powerful human being. It’s as if God is just the big kid on the block. The big kid is just like all the little guys, he is just bigger and so gets his way. But one day, the little guys grow up. This reductionism applied to God, making God to be in our image, makes the idea of God-as-God-is-God seem attainable for humans. Armstrongists can be just like the big kid – maybe so close to being like God, it’s not worth mentioning – perhaps, differing in only a quarter of inch in height. Not only would they rather believe HWA’s words than the Bible, HWA’s homespun words actually suit them – it matches how they want to think about God. But, alas, God is absolute and scales of measurement do not apply to him and Armstrongists need to seriously revise their Doctrine of God if they continue to hold these views.

Kuhn, Robert L. “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

 

Sproul, R.C. “What’s the Difference Between the Ontological and Economic Trinity?”: 

Note: This essay analyzes the doctrine of becoming God as presented in Classical Armstrongism. Robert L. Kuhn published in the Seventies.  I do not know how denominations derived from the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) now state this doctrine. Also, the words “ontology” and “economy”, in the theological sense, are nowhere used in Armstrongist literature that I can find.

 

 

Gloria in Excelsis Deo

Gerald Flurry: I'm Ok Being A Cult Leader Because Christ Was One Too!

Nothing infuriates Church of God splinter group leaders more than having their little groups referred to as a cult. How dare people do such a thing! After all, Christ was a cult leader just like they are. Since he preaches just like Christ did (supposedly), they are in the same boat that he was when it comes to having epitaphs hurled at them. The problem with that reasoning is not one single COG splinter group leader preaches Christ or even knows him intimately. The new has never been made new and the old still remains old. The new covenant is borderline blasphemy while the old covenant reigns supreme and kills the heart and soul.

When Flurry took his cult to Edmond Oklahoma and started his building campaigns, the local citizenry took notice. Area newspapers and news stations started exposing him in glaring details. That still pushes Flurry's buttons today, much like Bob Thiel still overreacting to Living Church of God kicking him to the curb.

This week Flurry sent out a rerun of his 2007 article whining about the persecution from the local news sources.

Back in 1994, a local newspaper published an article about the Philadelphia Church of God. The author titled the article, “Is It a Cult or ‘God’s Church’?” One subhead was about our unorthodox beliefs—as if that is bad. Webster’s Dictionary describes a cult as “a group with unorthodox beliefs.”

Jesus Christ had unorthodox beliefs! They were so unorthodox that they eventually got Him killed! And make no mistake about it, Christ was killed because of what He taught. The people liked Christ’s personality. “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man” (Luke 2:52). But they hated His message—and they hate Christ’s message today. That condition never changes. “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever” (Hebrews 13:8).

Armstrongism has hated the New Covenant message for decades and still does today. Talk about grace, sanctification, and justification and their noses curl up in mocking disdain. In their eyes, grace is nothing more than the license to sin. Christians are sinners while they, the near-perfect law keepers are the true Christians who conveniently ignore that they are constantly breaking the very law they hawk in their magazines and sermons. A set of laws that none of them keep or can ever keep properly. Heck, they can't even keep the sabbath properly and constantly look to find all kinds of convenient ways to do what they want that day.

Which group hated Christ most of all? The religious people were the ones screaming, “Crucify Him, crucify Him!” False religion continues to play that role today—all over the world. “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world …” (Revelation 12:9). Satan has totally deceived this world. The world’s religions don’t know who God is! Spiritually, they don’t even know themselves!

Flurry and his ilk continue to play the role today of deceiving the world about Jesus. They have no idea who he is because they do not even know themselves! Even the most nominal Christians know far more about Jesus and the New Covenant than any COG leader can ever claim to know.

The reporter had this to say in his article: “During the mid-1950s, he [Mr. Armstrong] published a pamphlet entitled, ‘1975 in Prophecy.’ It warned of a worldwide nuclear war in 1972 and Christ’s return three years later. … When the world didn’t end on schedule, Armstrong withdrew his pamphlet from circulation.” I was asked about this statement before the article was published. I told the reporter that not one of Mr. Armstrong’s critics could prove that statement about the book and they never have over the years! That is because Mr. Armstrong never said those events would occur on those dates. There was only speculation that those events could happen in that time period. I took the time to explain this in detail. The reporter still wrote the same statement without proof. And so the error is perpetuated without excuse! But reporters read such statements and often believe them because there are several critics making these claims. If people hear a statement frequently enough, they often believe it.

See how easily and deceitfully they jump around Herb's false prophecy that the church promoted in the 70's. Flurry and others continue to LIE that Herb and the church ever said such things as fact. 

Religion today has a similar problem. They have heard false teachings for years and they believe these false doctrines rather than what the Bible actually teaches. It will take years for these people to unlearn the errors before they can be deeply taught God’s truth! 

False teachers in the Church of God movement have had a field day over the last few decades as many of them set off on their own in self-righteous indignation and formed new splinter personality cults. They follow the supposed "rediscovery" of lost doctrines and teachings, that God was so incompetent in preserving for 1,900 years, till Herb found it in a Portland library in the 1930's. It has taken COG members decades to discard those erroneous teachings and unlearn the lies and half-truths the church taught.  

One religious author says a cult “is a perversion, a distortion of biblical Christianity and/or a rejection of the historic teachings of the Christian church.” But this is a great contradiction! “Historic teachings” of today’s “Christianity” itself pervert and distort “biblical Christianity”! Their “biblical Christianity” means mainstream Christianity, which is very unbiblical! 

Note the following on how pseudo-Christian cult leaders like Flurry manipulate followers:

"In recent international scientific literature, the authors, for reasons of tolerance and political correctness, normally tend to use such term as the New Religious Movements (NRM). There are a lot of law-abiding, non-violent citizens among the followers of the new occult, mystical, teachings, and postmodern concepts, while a certain percentage of active followers being overt criminals. We fully share the position of those scientists who have a comprehensive approach to this issue, avoiding a biased attitude, or any one-sided tendency to blame all NRM followers [17, 18].

The criminals of the 21st century, who act under the guise of missionaries, preachers, gurus, or spiritual mentors are highly professional. They resort to deception or breach of trust with a wide range of means and techniques, such as persuasion, hypnosis, threats/intimidation (mental violence). But it is the manipulation technologies that are the most efficient and widespread.

Once a victim joins a sect, the organizers do their best to kill his/her moral and ethical attitudes and form emotional dependence on the criminal leader (guru) or the most influential members of the group [19-21]. Such manipulations deprive mentally competent people of the ability to act on their own, turning them into demotivated creatures. The scope of their interests dramatically degrades, with the progressive destruction of the goal-setting ability. Further on, new incentive functions, crucial motives, conclusions (such as you’ve made the right choice) are imposed, and a total restructuring of the victims' conceptual hierarchy takes place. The victim's mindset is deprived of flexibility, logic, and criticality. With all consequent, regular manipulative impacts on the cognitive sphere of victims, the criminals get full control over the helpless state of the followers, making the sect members always committed only to the destructive behaviour model [22-24]."

A little later in the same paper, there is this:

What drives people who being competent turn to semi-legal (sometimes forbidden, destructive and nonconventional) cults, or pseudo-religious groups? 

 

Consider the subjective circumstances. Firstly, it is the boredom, the idle curiosity, the wish to touch something mysterious, exotic, or merely find some new, unconventional sources of information. The second circumstance is the fact that some people get disappointed in the traditional religions and family values. They feel frustrated about their lives facing a deep spiritual crisis. They try to overcome their frustration and get away from all problems by finding their soul mates. The third circumstance (however paradoxical it may seem) is the desire of some creatively thinking young people (especially those impulsive, prone to making snap decisions, but with no sufficient knowledge on manipulation) to grasp the true essence of the world. Such people are not satisfied with their role as consumers of information garbage. They want to be thoughtful observers of what is happening around them. Therefore, they address sectarians to get the answers to their questions. The fourth circumstance is an evident manifestation of the age-old prejudices and superstitions, which are still very much alive within all social groups and do not depend on the level of education, intelligence, or life experience of an individual. People still believe that esotericism can save them from all their trials and tribulations [48, 49]. Objective circumstances include effective ways to influence the psyche, as well as content created at a professional level. Destructive content captures the imagination of a person and deprives him of criticism. Victims lose the ability to act on their own [50, 51]. Destructive nature of manipulative content, created by leaders of totalitarian pseudo- religious cults

Today's members in groups like the Philadelphia Church of God, Restored Church of God, and the improperly named "continuing" Church of God have lost their ability to act on their own. To think and discern rationally is anathema to the great leader had his demands.

Flurry continues: 

According to the world’s definitions of a cult, Jesus Christ was a cult leader. We must remember that making such statements can bring severe persecution! Christ proved that. He was killed for what He taught. But soon, this world is going to be severely tried for practicing such gross deceit.

Yes, Christ was killed for what he taught, but Church of God leaders will not be persecuted for being Christ's followers when they do not even know the guy. The current "persecutions" today's COG leaders all whine about has nothing to do with "preaching boldly" but everything to do with the asinine teacings they foster off as 1st-century truths