I asked Ai tonight to tell me about the Banned by HWA blog. Here is what it said:
Banned by HWA: A Comprehensive Analysis of a Critical Voice in the Armstrongism Discourse
Banned by HWA! News and Observations About Armstrongism and the Church of God Movement is a blog that has carved out a significant niche in the critique of Armstrongism, a religious movement founded by Herbert W. Armstrong in the 1930s. Hosted on Blogger at armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com, the blog has become a central hub for former members, critics, and observers to expose alleged abuses, doctrinal errors, and leadership scandals within the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) and its splinter groups, collectively known as the Church of God (COG) movement. Since its inception, Banned by HWA has documented the movement’s controversies, provided a platform for personal testimonies, and challenged the authority of self-proclaimed COG leaders. This 10,000-word article offers an in-depth exploration of the blog’s origins, content, impact, controversies, and broader significance, situating it within the context of Armstrongism’s evolution and the rise of online ex-member communities.
I. Introduction: The Context of Armstrongism and the Need for Critique
Armstrongism: A Brief Overview
Armstrongism, named after Herbert W. Armstrong (1892–1986), emerged from the Radio Church of God, later renamed the Worldwide Church of God in 1968. Armstrong’s theology blended biblical literalism, British Israelism, Sabbatarianism, non-Trinitarianism, and apocalyptic prophecy, positioning the WCG as the sole “true church” restoring biblical Christianity. Key doctrines included the belief that Anglo-Saxon nations are descendants of biblical Israel, mandatory observance of the seventh-day Sabbath and Old Testament feasts, and predictions of an imminent end-times tribulation. Armstrong’s media empire, including The World Tomorrow radio and television broadcasts and The Plain Truth magazine, reached millions, peaking with over 100,000 members in the 1970s.
The WCG’s authoritarian structure, heavy tithing requirements (up to 30% of income), and strict behavioral codes led critics to label it a cult. Armstrong’s failed prophecies, such as a 1972 tribulation and 1975 return of Christ, caused disillusionment, while allegations of financial mismanagement and personal scandals, including claims of incest, further tarnished its reputation. After Armstrong’s death, the WCG’s shift toward evangelical orthodoxy under Joseph W. Tkach in the 1990s, culminating in its rebranding as Grace Communion International (GCI), alienated traditionalists, spawning splinter groups like the Philadelphia Church of God (PCG), United Church of God (UCG), and Living Church of God (LCG). These groups, varying in size and rigidity, continue Armstrong’s teachings, perpetuating controversies that Banned by HWA seeks to address.
The Rise of Online Critique
The internet has transformed how religious movements are scrutinized, enabling former members to share experiences, document abuses, and challenge official narratives. Blogs like Banned by HWA, alongside The Painful Truth and Exit and Support Network, represent a digital resistance to Armstrongism’s high-control environment. By providing anonymity, accessibility, and community, these platforms empower ex-members to reclaim their voices, making Banned by HWA a pivotal player in this discourse.
II. Origins and Evolution of Banned by HWA
Founding and Anonymity
Banned by HWA was launched in 2006 by an anonymous author, later identified as a former WCG member with ministerial experience, known by the pseudonym “NO2HWA.” The blog’s title reflects the WCG’s practice of “disfellowshipping” or banning members for questioning doctrine or leadership, a tactic that fostered fear and compliance. The author’s anonymity, a common feature of critical religious blogs, likely stems from concerns about harassment or retaliation from COG groups, which have a history of targeting dissenters, as seen in a 2017 incident where Wade Cox threatened legal action against critical sites.
The blog’s early posts focused on documenting the WCG’s historical abuses and the emerging antics of splinter groups. By 2017, it had gained significant traction, with posts like “Rod Meredith HATES This Blog!” highlighting its impact. A 2017 reflection, “After Another Year of Banned, Some Personal Food for Thought,” revealed the author’s personal journey from WCG minister to skeptic, driven by disillusionment with Armstrong’s doctrines and leadership. As of May 12, 2025, the blog remains active, with updates into 2024, including a YouTube short titled “Armstrongism Library Blog, a.k.a. Banned by HWA #cultsurvivor” posted on May 15, 2024.
Evolution and Growth
From its modest beginnings, Banned by HWA has grown into a comprehensive archive of Armstrongism’s controversies. By 2013, it claimed 1 million readers, reflecting its reach among ex-members, current COG members, and curious outsiders. Its evolution mirrors the COG movement’s fragmentation, with posts increasingly targeting splinter group leaders like David C. Pack, Gerald Flurry, and Bob Thiel, dubbed “The Great Bwana.” The blog’s scope has expanded to include doctrinal critiques, member testimonies, and satirical commentary, maintaining a direct, often irreverent tone that resonates with its audience.
The blog’s platform on Blogger, supplemented by a Facebook page with 348 likes and a YouTube channel, enhances its accessibility. Its longevity—nearly two decades—underscores its role as a persistent critic, adapting to new developments like the rise of social media and the decline of traditional COG influence.
III. Content and Themes of Banned by HWA
Banned by HWA is a rich tapestry of news, analysis, and personal stories, organized around several recurring themes that reflect its mission to expose Armstrongism’s “gritty and dirty underbelly.” Below is a detailed breakdown of its content.
Leadership Scandals and Abuses
A primary focus is the alleged misconduct of COG leaders, portrayed as self-appointed “Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars.” Posts document financial exploitation, authoritarian control, and personal scandals, often with a satirical edge:
- David C. Pack (Restored Church of God): Pack is a frequent target, criticized for his “Common” doctrine, which allegedly demands members liquidate assets, leaving them destitute. A 2017 post quotes a former RCG staff member: “Packatolla’s Common requires members to give up their equity in homes.” His 91 failed prophetic dates since 2022, including a 2024 prediction for April 8, are mocked, with Pack admitting, “Everything I have written is wrong!”
- Gerald Flurry (PCG): Flurry’s lavish lifestyle and strict control, including money problems and sermon restrictions, are highlighted in posts like “Philadelphia Church of God Money Problems: Gerald.”
- Bob Thiel (Continuing Church of God): Thiel, self-proclaimed prophet, is ridiculed for his “mysterious ThD” and vague predictions, with posts like “Almost Arrested Ambiguous COG Prophet” detailing his struggles to secure venues.
- Rod Meredith (LCG): Before his death, Meredith’s legalistic leadership and sermon on hating the blog are spotlighted, as in “Rod Meredith HATES This Blog!”
These critiques aim to hold leaders accountable, exposing contradictions between their claims of divine authority and their actions.
Doctrinal Critiques
The blog challenges Armstrongist doctrines, arguing they deviate from biblical Christianity and sustain a culture of control. Key targets include:
- British Israelism: Posts like “A Short Critique of Herbert W. Armstrong’s British-Israelism” debunk the claim that Anglo-Saxon nations are Israel’s descendants, citing scriptural misinterpretations.
- Sabbatarianism and Feasts: The blog questions the mandatory observance of the Sabbath and feasts like the Feast of Tabernacles, with a 2024 post noting CGI’s Bill Watson urging members to save for feasts as a spiritual act.
- Prophetic Failures: Armstrong’s unfulfilled predictions, such as 1975, are a recurring theme, extended to modern leaders like Pack and Thiel. A 2017 post, “Five Years Ago A Church of God Leader Lied To His Members,” criticizes the ongoing “scam” of prophecy.
- Paganism and Holidays: The blog critiques Armstrongism’s rejection of Christmas as pagan, with a 2024 post asking, “How do Armstrongists deal with the logical issue of the Genetic Fallacy?” arguing that a pagan history doesn’t inherently taint modern practices.
These critiques often engage with theological arguments, appealing to readers seeking intellectual rebuttals to Armstrongist teachings.
Personal Testimonies and Member Experiences
A significant portion of the blog features stories from former members, detailing the emotional, financial, and social toll of Armstrongism. These testimonies, often submitted via comments or guest posts, resonate with readers who share similar experiences:
- A 2017 post, “After Another Year of Banned,” reflects the author’s regret over WCG involvement, citing divorce and missed career opportunities.
- A 2024 comment by “Trooisto” compares Armstrongist ministers to abusers, highlighting control tactics.
- Posts like “MisterdiffiCULT on growing up in Armstrongism” feature TikTok creator sharing cult survivor stories, amplifying younger voices.
These narratives foster a sense of community, validating ex-members’ struggles and aiding recovery.
Satire and Humor
The blog’s irreverent tone, marked by nicknames like “Packatolla,” “Crazypot Bob,” and “Bullshit Bob,” uses humor to deflate the grandiose claims of COG leaders. A 2023 post sarcastically hails Thiel as “the Great Bwana Bob Mzungu Thiel,” mocking his self-importance. Satirical posts, like one proposing a “Hot Rod Church of God” splinter with a sword logo, blend humor with critique, appealing to readers familiar with the movement’s absurdities.
Current Events and Cultural Commentary
The blog connects Armstrongism to broader issues, such as anti-vaccination stances during COVID-19 or conservative political rhetoric. A 2017 post on Wade Cox’s alleged terrorist threat against a national park illustrates the movement’s fringe elements, while a 2024 post critiques the LCG’s sermon restrictions as cult-like. These posts situate Armstrongism within contemporary religious and social debates.
IV. Impact and Reception
Influence on the Armstrongism Community
Banned by HWA has significantly shaped the discourse around Armstrongism, influencing both critics and COG members:
- Provoking Leadership Reactions: The blog’s impact is evident in responses from COG leaders. Rod Meredith’s 2017 sermon denouncing it inadvertently drove traffic to the site, while David C. Pack referenced it as a “final attack” by “wicked people.” Bob Thiel criticized it as “negative and full of hate” on cogwriter.com, indicating its threat to COG authority.
- Support for Ex-Members: The blog serves as a lifeline for former members, offering validation and community. Comments like “I was disfellowshipped from WCG for dating a young lady outside of the Church” reveal the personal toll of COG policies, with the blog providing a safe space to share.
- Educating Outsiders: By documenting Armstrongism’s history and practices, the blog informs those unfamiliar with the movement, including scholars and journalists. Its mention in The Journal and Living Armstrongism underscores its role in broader discussions.
Reach and Engagement
While exact traffic data is unavailable, the blog’s claim of 1 million readers by 2013 suggests significant reach. Its Facebook page and YouTube channel, though modest in followers, amplify engagement, with posts shared among ex-member networks. The blog’s comment sections are active, with hundreds of responses on popular posts, reflecting a dedicated readership of ex-members, skeptics, and occasional defenders.
Comparison with Other Platforms
Banned by HWA operates alongside other critical platforms like The Painful Truth, Exit and Support Network, and Living Armstrongism. While The Painful Truth focuses on historical WCG abuses and Exit and Support Network offers recovery resources, Banned by HWA stands out for its blend of news, satire, and personal stories, making it a dynamic hub for ongoing critique. Its overlap with Living Armstrongism, which provides detailed doctrinal analyses, creates a complementary network of critical voices.
V. Controversies and Criticisms
Accusations of Bias and Mockery
Banned by HWA has faced criticism from COG members and leaders for its perceived bias and irreverent tone:
- COG Defenders: A 2023 comment by “Koke61” called it a “satanic blog, full of ridicule and resentment,” accusing it of mocking sacred beliefs. Bob Thiel’s critique labeled it hateful, reflecting COG leaders’ view that it distorts their message.
- Tone and Satire: The blog’s nicknames and sarcasm, such as “Wolfman Packatolla,” alienate some readers. A 2023 comment criticized its “self-righteous overtones,” arguing it blames victims rather than leaders. Ex-members occasionally find the humor juvenile, preferring serious analysis, though others see it as a necessary tool to dismantle COG authority.
Anonymity and Accountability
The author’s anonymity, while protective, raises questions about accountability. Critics argue that anonymous claims lack credibility, though the blog counters this by citing COG publications, public records, and member testimonies. A 2017 incident involving Wade Cox’s legal threats against critical sites highlights the risks of public exposure, justifying anonymity.
Theological Disputes
Some ex-members and commentators, like Ian Boyne in a 2017 The Journal discussion, argue that Banned by HWA focuses too heavily on scandals, neglecting Armstrongism’s theological strengths, such as its emphasis on biblical study. Boyne praised James Tabor’s “benign assessment” of Armstrongism, suggesting critics acknowledge its positive aspects. The blog responds by arguing that doctrinal flaws underpin the movement’s abuses, as seen in posts critiquing the “Doctrine of Incompletion” around Christmas.
Victim-Blaming Allegations
A 2023 post, “How Easily Armstrongism Fell For Errors (And Still Does),” sparked debate for implying members share responsibility for believing Armstrong’s claims. A commenter countered, “Your ‘but WE bought into it…’ smells of blame the victim,” noting many were young or vulnerable when joining. The blog clarified that its intent was to encourage critical thinking, not shame former members.
VI. Broader Significance and Legacy
Role in Religious Critique
Banned by HWA exemplifies the internet’s transformative role in religious critique, paralleling ex-Mormon, ex-Scientology, and ex-Jehovah’s Witness platforms. By documenting Armstrongism’s abuses, it challenges the movement’s narrative of divine authority, fostering informed discourse. Its blend of journalism, satire, and personal narrative sets a precedent for how digital platforms can hold religious groups accountable.
Support for Recovery
The blog’s testimonies and comment sections create a virtual support group, aiding ex-members’ recovery from high-control environments. Posts like “On a Personal Note,” where the author shares their journey to skepticism, resonate with readers navigating similar transitions. This aligns with broader trends in cult recovery, where online communities provide validation and resources.
Scholarly and Cultural Relevance
For scholars of new religious movements, Banned by HWA is a primary source for studying Armstrongism’s decline and the dynamics of high-control groups. Its documentation of prophetic failures, leadership scandals, and member experiences offers insights into cultic behavior, complementing works like Herbert Armstrong’s Tangled Web and The Broadway to Armageddon. Culturally, it reflects the internet’s role in democratizing critique, challenging hierarchical institutions in an era of information accessibility.
Future Prospects
As Armstrongism’s influence wanes, with splinter groups struggling to attract new members, Banned by HWA may shift focus to historical analysis or broader cult dynamics. Its continued relevance depends on the COG movement’s persistence and the blog’s ability to engage younger audiences, as seen in its TikTok collaborations. The rise of AI-driven content analysis could further amplify its reach, though it risks diluting its personal voice.
VII. Challenges and Limitations
Sustainability and Burnout
Maintaining a critical blog for nearly two decades is challenging, with risks of burnout for the anonymous author. The emotional toll of revisiting Armstrongism’s abuses, as expressed in personal posts, suggests a need for community support to sustain the blog’s momentum.
Limited Mainstream Reach
Despite its niche influence, Banned by HWA struggles to penetrate mainstream discourse due to Armstrongism’s declining visibility. Its modest social media presence limits broader engagement, though collaborations with platforms like TikTok could bridge this gap.
Balancing Critique and Constructive Dialogue
The blog’s focus on scandals and satire sometimes overshadows constructive theological or recovery-focused content, alienating readers seeking deeper analysis. Expanding posts like those on the Jerusalem Council or Christmas paganism could broaden its appeal.
VIII. Conclusion
Banned by HWA stands as a testament to the power of digital platforms in challenging religious authority and fostering community among those affected by high-control groups. Since 2006, it has exposed Armstrongism’s controversies, from leadership abuses to doctrinal errors, while providing a voice for ex-members to share their stories. Its irreverent tone, while divisive, has effectively punctured the movement’s aura of invincibility, provoking reactions from COG leaders and supporting countless survivors. Despite criticisms of bias and anonymity, the blog’s reliance on firsthand accounts and public records lends credibility to its claims.
As Armstrongism fragments and its splinter groups fade, Banned by HWA remains a vital archive of a movement marked by prophecy, power, and pain. Its legacy lies in its role as a catalyst for critical thinking, recovery, and resistance, offering lessons for understanding cults and the digital age’s impact on religious discourse. Whether it continues to critique active COG groups or evolves into a historical resource, Banned by HWA will endure as a beacon for those seeking truth amid the shadows of Armstrongism.
