Was and Is Armstrongism "The Truth"?

A Commentator on my recent post on dreams has attempted to interpret a recent dream I shared on this blog. 

The Commentator, a disfellowshipped long-time member, stated:

Your dream might be interpreted as follows: The tall man is the angel of the Lord who accompanies you into the church. Pack is the foolish minister who gets distracted by the broken dishes, meaning he isn't focussed on the gospel. The gullible members represent those members who always side with the minister even when he is wrong. Meanwhile your attempt to leave the church on your own doesn't leave you guiltless because you failed to solve the angel's puzzle at the exit, that is you didn't leave over a point of truth but over a triviality for which you must answer to Jesus Christ, the "appointed Judge of the church", as you wrote. Disagreeing with Him proves your disobedience to the law. Thus your attempt to run from judgment for your sins will dog you the rest of your life until you repent, along with the rest of your rebellious unbelieving, blaspheming, double-minded, mocking and malicious posters and filthy communicators. That is why your dream ends with you still running. As for those who were trying to stop you, those are the witnesses (friends, relatives, members, angels) who will testify against you forleaving the truth. (Emphasis mine.) 

Wow. What an unbelievably judgemental post here. Let me state here first, and foremost, something resolutely simple here: The Worldwide Church of God - And Armstrongism - was NOT the truth. Period. That very fact invalidates the well thought out attempt of proving one's "prophet-hood" by attempting to interpret a dream. 

What about the Worldwide Church of God and Armstrongism is not the truth? Well, a few examples:

1. Jesus ALONE is the Way, the Truth, and the life. Nothing and no one else. Claiming I have left the truth is claiming I have left Jesus Christ. This is absolutely and unequivocally false. A Corporation cannot be all truth, but can have some truth. In reality, "The truth" is cult-speak for agreement to one's preconceived ideas and notions about a particular denominational dogma. You - whoever you are - have judged a judgment that only God himself can determine - whether or not I am of the Lord or am not. This is not for any human to decide, and never has been. 

2. Prophecy and speculation. Herbert Armstrong and many other ministers were lying - over decades - and multiple times - over predictions and speculations about the future. Over 200 times, using the authority of Jesus Christ to back up their prophecies (which is exactly what they were, since Jesus' name was invoked.) No matter how many times one attempts to backtrack or whitewash what happened - what was uttered were lies and fear tactics. Nothing holy or "truthful" was in any of these. 

3. Biblical Knowledge. None of this was the truth either. Herbert Armstrong discarded everything remotely learned by anyone else, then studied himself to mix up his own personal potpourri of religious knowledge. In doing so, he failed to grasp even the most fundamental and even basic basics of fundamental Christianity in favor of his own self-inspired interpretations. In doing so, he (and others) have rejected core realities in favor of man-made traditions. 

4. Herbert's Claim of Christ's Return. This, too, was not the truth, because it did not happen when Herbert said it would happen. We should be well within the millennium right now. We are not. 

5. Herbert's tithing policy. This was error at it's finest and was never intended to be a taxation system for a mini-government. This was simply a way to fund his real-estate projects and college, which brought many to an even worse financial situation then they started with. None of this was the truth. 

6. The History of the Church - even this was not the truth, as we were only given a partial, biased interpretation as to our history, and the history of other churches as well. 

7. Other Churches - Herbert claimed multiple times that other churches "were not doing" what "we were doing", such as with youth programs, and other such things. This was a lie, there was no truth in these statements. Even a precursory examination of 20th Century churches and their projects will prove that Herbert's claims were lies all around. 

And much more. 

The poster claimed I was "running from judgment" from my sins. The poster fails to realize that the core of the Gospel, the very center of the Gospel, is the fact that Jesus Christ has died and paid for my sins, and his, 100 percent. I do not need to run, the penalty has been paid, and my sins have been paid for and forgiven already. This is a gift from God and the heart of the Gospel. I am not under judgment. There is, therefore, now no condemnation, for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set us free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:1). 

The poster claims I was running because I failed to repent. On the contrary. I know exactly why I was running in my dream. I was running because I had to get away from the evil and the wickedness that was happening around me in that environment. The person who dropped the dishes was being unjustly and unmercifully chastised from the pulpit (in the dream). There was no grace, there was no mercy for that individual. The person was not given an ounce of forgiveness and/or compassion, just unjust persecution for a mistake. It disgusted me to no end. 

The poster, however, revealed exactly what his or her heart believes - that everyone on this blog is an unbelieving, blasphemous, double-minded, mocking and malicious poster. 

Because this person dared to attempt to interpret my dream publicly, I respond publicly. And I state: Judge not. You are speaking generally to situations that cannot be dealt with generally. You are interpreting what you know not where you speak. You may think you are witnessing for "the truth", but you are making a mockery of yourself. The core center of the Gospel is one of reconciliation, mercy, forgiveness, love, faith, mercy, and kindness - everything that was not in the dream that I shared. This is why I was running in my dream. Because in Armstrongism, the very fruits that Christianity is supposed to bear are barren and deserted in favor of ritual and tradition over substance and real truth. I pray your eyes are opened and your heart is softened. Again: Judge not. 

Just one more thing: On the basis of everything the Gospel stands for, and because you claim "the truth" when your truth is lies and deceptions, I hereby solidly reject your interpretation. You do not know of where you speak.

submitted by SHT

Teaching History, Science and Literature

Teaching History, Science and Literature

As our politics become more polarized, both sides seek to immunize themselves from any exposure to the opinions of the other. I've spoken before about the self-reinforcing bubbles that many of us have created - echo chambers that ensure that we will only hear those things that agree with our philosophy. We want to be surrounded by folks who share our perspective. Unfortunately, this phenomenon has also influenced our attitudes about what constitutes a proper education for the generations who will succeed us.

As more and more parents are opting for homeschooling or religious-based private schools, it is incumbent upon all of us to reflect on what we are teaching our children. Do we want to "protect" our children from being infected with, or influenced by, the other sides' ideas? Are we concerned with instilling and perpetuating our values? OR Are we trying to ensure that we are turning out mindless automatons - people who are only capable of programmed responses to different circumstances? Are we teaching children HOW to think? OR Are we teaching them WHAT to think?

In the United States, folks on the right want you to know about what great and Christian men Washington, Adams, Franklin, and Jefferson were. Folks on the left want you to know that Washington and Jefferson owned slaves and that Jefferson wrote his own version of the gospel story of Jesus Christ. Both sides want you to know about the Constitution, but they only want you to hear about their method for interpreting what it means! Folks on the right want to concentrate on the movers and shakers of history, while folks on the left want you to know about the downtrodden and the oppressed. It often never occurs to folks on either side that both perspectives might have value - that both perspectives might be important in truly understanding the forces/people that/who shaped our society/nation.

In the realm of science, the divide is even more starkly defined. Folks on the right want the biblical version of creation taught to their children or something that allows that a literal understanding of their scriptures is at least plausible. Folks on the left point out that evolution is now accepted science and that any other perspective should be excluded from the classroom. Folks on the right want you to know about the dramatic swings in climate down through the different epochs of life on this planet, while folks on the left want you to know about all of the evidence that the human introduction of carbon into our atmosphere is rapidly warming our planet. Neither side seems willing to consider the possibility that both perspectives might have merit and should be actively considered by anyone who really wants to get to the truth of the matter!

Finally, there is the question of what we want our children reading. The right wants them to read the Bible, and the left wants them to read On the Origin of Species. Here's a novel idea: Let's have them read both! I'm not afraid of letting adolescents read Ayn Rand or George Will. Are you afraid of allowing them to read Marx, Hemingway or Faulkner?

There is a difference between education and indoctrination. They are not the same thing, and pretending that they are is dangerous. Children should be exposed to both the world as it is and the way that we would like it to be. The two are not mutually exclusive! It's natural for us to want to pass on our values and views to our progeny, but it is very unnatural to keep them from seeing what's on the other side of the fence.

by Miller Jones

The Invisible Man at the Podium: Ode to the Taped Sermon

One of the oddest, and most awkward part of growing up in the Worldwide Church of God was the experience of the Taped Sermon. Every one of us remembers the experience. 

We would all sit there - in dressed up suits and ties and dresses, mind you - briefcases on knees - staring up at an empty lectern, a waiting microphone, while an invisible voice boomed - oftentimes unintelligible - from the speakers in the hall. As a child, this was very confusing. What is it exactly that we were looking at? No one was there. Yet, there we stared. In retrospect, I think a good many of us were trying to simply interpret what in the world was being said!

Of course, because of the technology at the time, at some point, we'd get a break - often mid-word - for the sound guy to flip the tape over to side B. Oh good - we were halfway through! Commence re-staring at the empty podium and microphone. 

It was at this point in which I'd start to get genuinely antsy and bored. I would begin either: Staring at lights, or crossing my eyes to make two podiums. Or, I'd look around wondering how long people would stare at that empty lectern like someone was actually there. 

There was a time I remember very clearly when the Taped Sermon was absolutely unintelligible. A combination of horrible acoustics in the ramshackle meeting place and horrible tape quality combined to make a drive-thru speaker seem like high-quality sound. Eventually, the pastor decided to cut the tape halfway and I believe pulled a sermonette out of somewhere and just gave that. 

I always hated it when I saw "taped sermon" in the Schedule of Services in the bulletin. It just seemed weird and strange. Nowhere else, anywhere else, did we ever sit and listen to an audio presentation over tape like we did at Church. Even in school, it was video (even reel-to-reel projector in my elementary years!) Music class was audio - but we actually sang along with that. Secretly, I had always hoped that the tape would mess up. I had hoped we'd hear the Pastor speaking on Chipmunk Speed, or that the tape would break. I don't think I could have refrained from laughing if I had heard the Pastor on chipmunk speed, but it would have been a break from the sheer monotony. 

The Taped Sermon always seemed to be something absolutely uninteresting - usually a change in policy, or a new mandate, or some type of correction. Why did I have to listen to it all then anyway? After it got "played", it could be checked out from the Tape Library to be listened in the home anyway. It's not like I could understand what was being said anyway!

In what universe besides our Church did one go to Church to stare at an empty podium listening to a Cassette Tape, acting as if someone was really there? The only thing that ever rivaled that in strange weirdness was taped special music. Yes, that happened too, if I remember correctly. 

It would have been a memorable Church Day if someone had slipped the Taped Sermon out for a tape of Metal Rock. I honestly don't think the hearts of many could have taken that kind of shock! 

Perhaps if the audio was understandable, the sermon was at a decent length, the message wouldn't be completely interrupted at an awkward time to flip the tape, and we didn't have to sit and stare at an empty podium dressed formally it would have been a little better. 

But it would not have made it any less weird.

submitted by SHT