A Meditation on Tyrannosaurus Rex: Apokatastasis, Dinosauria and Armstrongism

 T. Rex in perspective.  (Fair Use)

A Meditation on Tyrannosaurus Rex

Apokatastasis, Dinosauria and Armstrongism

By Scout

 

Dinosaurs were monsters and they reigned on earth for about 160 million years. Homo sapiens has been on earth for a short 300,000 years by comparison.  I have puzzled over why there were dinosaurs.  At one point I concluded that it was to provide our modern human society with fossil fuels.  And fossil fuels were a necessary part of our learning experience.  God furnished the classroom with fossil fuels.  Like a nursery school playroom is furnished with blocks. But dinosaurs did not make a big contribution to oil deposits.  Most of the deposits were created from the remains of tiny sea life.  So, why was earth like a Monsterland for 160 million years?  What does this tell us about God?  I have a theory. 

The Armstrongist View

The Armstrongists press has published a number of articles on dinosaurs and I looked at a few.  While the writers support the view that dinosaurs died in a worldwide catastrophe, there is no direct statement about who created dinosaurs.  The catastrophism comports with the scientific findings that posit a globally destructive asteroid impact that formed the Chicxulub Crater. But in these articles the origin of dinosaurs is vague.  The assertion is that the earth was under the management of angels and the angels rebelled and the world became chaotic.  And the reader is to deduce that the dinosaurs fit into this chaos in some way.   Further thinking about the origins must have taken place although in my cursory review I could find nothing in print.  But I did hear a WCG minister back in the Eighties make a statement about origins but I do not know who developed the idea.  He said that God created all the creatures of the earth but angels manipulated the genomes of some creatures to produce dinosaurs. Angels cannot create directly but can modify what has already been created.  I should have asked the pastor where he got the information but I was not in the habit of questioning WCG ministers back then. 

There are issues with the Armstrongist theory that I will just mention briefly.  The dinosaur world was not chaotic.  It was a stable creation.  It persisted for 160 million years and would have gone on longer if it had not been interdicted by an asteroid. And if it was a foul creation why would God have permitted it to go on so long?  God did not balk at destroying the evil society of ancient Mesopotamia with a flood.  The Chicxulub asteroid could have hit much earlier. And we know now that modern day birds are descended from dinosaurs so dinosaurs did not go extinct.  They were instead moderated for the human environment.  Something useful for humans came out of something that was initially something dangerous for humans had there been humans around back then. The important theme is not destruction but renewal.  The fact is that T. Rex has only an abstract, perhaps literary, meaning for humans – humans have never co-existed with the monstrousness of T. Rex. I had a couple of eggs this morning for breakfast and enjoyed them. So, the Armstrongist history of sauropods fits uneasily on this data.

Apokatastasis (Restoration, Restitution, Regeneration)

Peter spoke of the Apokatastasis as he preached on Solomons’ Porch in the Temple (Acts 3:21).  Peter said, “…until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.”  The word for restitution in Greek is apokatastasis.  Robin Parry, a British theologian and author, pointed out that the scenario for the Cosmos is: First the original creation in Genesis, then the Cross, and then the re-creation.  There will be a New Heavens and a New Earth.  In Rev 21:4, John of Patmos writes, “… for the former things are passed away.”  John of Patmos also wrote something that he heard, “And he (God) that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.”

God created Jurassic Park but why this interest in something so horrifically monstrous?  The horror of it is really a function of size.  If you were the size of a flea, the insect biome in your backyard would seem like Jurassic Park.  But God is not limited by size.  He created the idea of size.  If T. Rex were the size of a humming bird, he would be comic instead of horrific.  He would be something that kids would buy for the terrarium.  And we might be put off by the predator-prey cycle of these great carnivores.  T. Rex ate other dinosaurs in order to live.  But we eat animals, too.  When an Armstrongist sits in a comfortable restaurant on a Holy Day and makes a gustatory assault on a steak, he doesn’t think of himself as a T. Rex.  But it is the same principle of consumption.  It is just that T. Rex is not as genteel and tidy.  And, of course, he would have eaten us if we had been around. In the view of T. Rex, we would be just another snack. So, the horror and monstrosity are a matter of perspective.

My belief is that in the first creation, T. Rex was a monster from the human perspective.  But in the future he will be renewed and made something useful for humankind.  Maybe he will be a little multi-colored bird flitting happily through the forest giving cheer to all.  It is conjectural but renewal may even focus on the original Tyrannosauri.  They might be reconstituted but in a different form.  If God creates something, does it ever really pass out of existence? Maybe it is, rather, transformed for good and will appear again in due season. As long as God knows something, it has the potential to be again. And he knows everything.  James says in Acts 15:18, “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the Age.”  And T. Rex is one of his works.  And maybe that work will not be finished until the Apokatastasis. 

The focus of much apocalyptic theology is on the idea of God as Destroyer. God is going to come back to earth and destroy a bunch of stuff as the faithful watch the fireworks gleefully from some place of safety.  In counterpoint, the Bible’s emphasis is on transformation and renewal.  The reason why the destroyer motif does not fly is that the creation is a reflection of God himself.  He invested his character in the creation.  He did not create something alien when he made the Cosmos.  He made something that will be ultimately useful and joyous.  He will not leave it in a diminished state. Like the poet Robert Frost wrote, ”The question that he frames in all but words Is what to make of a diminished thing”.  God will not leave the creation in a diminished state because it reflects what he is. 

Conclusion: T. Rex Redux

For Armstrongists T. Rex is all about rebellion and destruction.  For Christians, T. Rex is all about restoration and all things working for good.  Has God ever created anything that he cannot save and renew – something that is just beyond his capabilities like Dr. Frankenstein?  Is a creation that goes rogue forever without restitution not a kind of profound defeat?  And how can a God who is absolute, who generates reality itself, be defeated?  Evil will pass away.  Evil has no substance.  It is rather an absence of Good.  When God created all things, he said the creation was good.  Evil is a parasite on this goodness. I look forward to seeing what God will do with T. Rex in the Apokatastasis.  Because he said in Isaiah, “But be ye glad and rejoice forever in that which I create.”

 

Crackpot Prophet Continues To Be Perturbed That No One Considers His Ordination Valid

 

It has been a hard couple of days at the world-famous Grover Beach headquarters of the church that has become the laughing stock of Armstrongism. Its world-renowned leader, widely sought theologian, world's foremost historian, herb peddler, diviner of Catholic mysticism, and self-appointed prophet to the Churches of God, has been popping his cork over various articles on Banned in the last few days, calling out his illegitimate ordination. How can the world's most perfect old-covenant pseudo-Christian handle all of this? Lash out, as usual.

In a looooooooong tirade today about apostolic ordination by laying on of hands, the Great Bwana tries to define his self-imagined ordination by Gaylyn Bonjour as a legitimate ordination that carries deep apostolic historical roots (which it doesn't).

The Great Bwana spends a lot of time trying to denigrate the ordination process and apostolic succession claims of the Catholic Church. Then he drags in dead Herb to denigrate Andrew Dugger and the so-called Sardis COG7.

Herbert W. Armstrong claimed that A.N. Dugger had been unfaithful to the word of God (and he was) and that A.N. Dugger/CG7 no longer possessed the ‘mantle’ of leadership past 1933 (if not sooner, and if he ever had it. An other Sardis era leader, John S. Stanford, may have held it instead of A.N. Dugger).

So what kind of mantle does the church need to possess for legitimate ordinations to take place? We have been hearing a lot about the subject in COG groups lately, and that is church government. Church government is vitally important to Armstrongism because it keeps members under control and subjected to abuse above them without recourse.

Since Church leaders are appointed and not voted into office, and since, therefore, the members are not watchdogs over the leaders, who is responsible for keeping these leaders on track spiritually and administratively? 

 

1. The answer is that God’s government in His Church is a government of faith. Simply put, this means members believe that behind the physical, outward appearance of the Church, is the unseen hand of Jesus Christ, who directs its affairs.

2. True Christians today trust Christ to direct the Church, bless it, correct it or its officers if need be and steer its general course.

3. From the time of Moses and the rebellion of Korab (a leader in the congregation who was killed by God for insubordination — Numbers 16), through the age of the apostles and the rejection of Judas Iscariot from his apostleship, to the present day, Christ has demonstrated His ability to: 

 

1. run His Church,

2. place capable men in their proper positions,

3. discipline those who need it,

4. and reject from the Church those unfit to wear the Christian mantle. 

 

4. The very existence of the Church and the Church’s continuing vitality proves this beyond dispute! (Doctrines of the Church: Church Governance. Worldwide Church of God, 1986/1987) 

 

From the time of Moses and the rebellion of Korah (a leader in the congregation who was killed by God for insubordination — Numbers 16) , through the age of the apostles and the rejection of Judas Iscariot from his apostleship, to the present day, Christ has demonstrated His ability to run His Church, place capable men in their proper positions, discipline those who need it and reject from His Church those unfit to wear the Christian mantle. The very existence of the Church and the Church’s continuing vitality prove this beyond dispute! (Prove All Things: Governance in the Church. Good News, May 1986)

As you can see, proper church government in the Church of God is all about control. Note in the very first quoted paragraph this: "...the members are not watchdogs over the leaders". This is why the leadership in the Churches of God never concerned themselves with what the lower-class church members thought of them. In fact, in the articles of incorporation for almost every COG group out there, the  official members of the church are listed as the ministry, not the lay members. 

These kinds of shenanigans worked well for corrupt church leaders until the internet age hit and the crap started getting exposed. Now their dirty deeds are well known and, in many cases, have effectively stunted the growth of certain COG groups, particularly with the so-called "continuing" Church of God.

The Great Bwana then ends his article with this desperate plea to legitimize himself as apostolically ordained:

In my own case, hands were laid upon me by an elder in the Living Church of God.

This is a blatant lie, and Bob knows it! In no way whatsoever did Gaylyn Bonjour lay hands on Bob to ordain him. It was a blessing to say the right things when he went in to see Rod Meredith. Gaylyn's blessing was NOT an ordination, and Gaylyn said so several times before he died. Even the Living Church of God has refuted this claim as a lie. 

God used the laying on of hands in the Old Testament.

Little children in the COG movement have hands laid on them at the blessing of the children, and none of them claim it as an ordination. Church members have had hands laid on them when they ask for healing, and none of them claim to be ordained.  In some church areas, graduating high school students have had hands laid on them for a blessing that they use their education wisely, and yet, none of them claim ordination. This claim by Bob is a subtle attempt to justify his lack of ordination. 

In the New Testament, God used the laying on of hands to grant His Holy Spirit to the baptized as well as to those that are to be in His ministry. Plus, it is a tool God uses, when people avail themselves of it, for healing. 

 

Church of God leaders have recognized the doctrine of the laying on of hands throughout history. 

 

We also have been faithful to the original teachings of the apostles. 

 

Hence the Church of God, not the Church of Rome, possesses true apostolic succession. 

 

The true Church of God has had laying on of hands succession from the time of the apostles in Acts chapter 2 to present.

Bob Thiel has had none of this. Every single Church of God he was a part of refused to ordain him. 

The laying on of hands is an elementary doctrine of the true church (Hebrews 6:1-2). 

Laying on of hands in any church, "true" church or "worldly" church, does NOT imply ordination. Never has and never will. There is a specific time and place for that in every church out there. The Great Bwana Bob has NEVER had that happen. 

It is an official belief of the Continuing Church of God.

Crackpot Prophet Still Upset Over Finding Out He Is Not Apostolically Ordained

 

The Great Bwana has this little tidbit up today, trying to legitimize himself and his church as following in the line of apostolic succession, which is supposed to make his "ordination" legitimate. Mind you, this is a man whom the Worldwide Church of God, Global Church of God, and Living Church of God REFUSED to ordain due to his lack of humility, narcissism, and prideful boasting. This then led him to fictionalize in his head that the "supposed" double blessing by Gaylyn Bonjour was actually an ordination. It wasn't, and Gaylyn Bonjour said he never intended that when he laid hands on Bwana Bob. The Great Bwana then had to have one of his African followers, who was ordained by another Sabbatarian group, ordain him. If Herbert Armstrong were alive, he would have kicked Bob to the curb swiftly and without mercy. No man in the history of the COG movement has ever been refused by so many COG groups for ordination!

The time is coming when the Beast power will rise up and, at first, I expect that he and his supporters will give lip service to the idea of the Greco-Roman apostolic sees as partial proof why they, and not groups like the Continuing Church of God, have ties to apostolic Christianity. They will be wrong, of course. But we of the faithful flock need to be able to explain why they are wrong and that is part of why I posted this about the claimed ‘see’ of Venice. 

 

Only those who have the same teachings and practices of the apostles can possibly have true apostolic succession. 

 

Which brings to the third point: we in the Church of God do have apostolic succession.
In the Continuing Church of God we trace our succession through what has been called the “Apostolic See of Ephesus,” but also sometimes called the “See of Smyrna.”

A reminder for Bob from: Bob Thiel's Ordination Conundrum and His False Claim of Legitimacy

LOFCOG asked:

Does the witch doctor's ordination and alleged succession also extend to his animated Cartoon Bob character as well?

I'm convinced that it was Evans' idea, not Bob's, to have Evans lay hands on Bob. When you lay hands on someone, you are showing yourself to be their superior. Evans needed to lay hands on Bob to show his African flock that Bob was subordinate to him. But doing this screwed up Bob's claim to legitimacy. Deep down, despite all his mincing and flailing about it, Bob didn't trust his accidental "ordination" from Gaylon Bonjour, so he was willing to accept a real and intentional one from Evans. But you can't ordain someone to an office higher than you hold, unless it's some special one-off miracle like Bob used to say happened when Gaylon laid hands on him. Once Bob decided to supplement Gaylon's ordination with Evans', he lost all claim of being anything more than another evangelist. He can't be a prophet anymore.

"The dangerous part about putting a leader on a pedestal is that they become your god. 

You take God off the pedestal and you replace it with your leader."