Dave Pack: Jesus Now Returning On October 6, 2025

 

Just when you think the Church of Godland can't get any more absurd, along comes Dave Pack to remove all doubt! He now claims Jesus will return on October 6, during the Feast, asserting this date marks exactly 10 years of his prophetic nonsense. Even more baffling are the employees and church members who sit there listening to his claims and believing every word.
Dave's followers have been so exploited that they can no longer recognize deception. Their cognitive dissonance has overwhelmed them, leading them to rationalize all of Dave's inconsistencies to avoid discomfort. Their lives have already been upended by giving everything to the church, so the fear of questioning Dave risks isolating them from the group's identity. They are all in this together now, until the end. Thankfully, on rare occasions, a lightbulb moment occurs, and people wake up and leave, breaking free from the controlling group dynamics.
While we may view Dave as an isolated case, he mirrors figures like Bob Thiel, Ron Weinland, and Gerald Flurry. These leaders have mastered deception by manipulating information and trust, telling their small flocks they are special and called out. This enchants believers who struggle to find a place in the world, feeding their need to feel significant and distinct from the fallen society around them. They create an "us vs. them" narrative, positioning their group as uniquely enlightened or chosen, boosting members' self-esteem and loyalty. This exclusivity is reinforced through supposed doctrinal purity, Holy day and Sabbath keeping, special insider knowledge, and specific promises of salvation—such as becoming kings, priests, and rulers of worlds at Jesus' right hand. This makes followers feel superior to outsiders, the worldly heathens, and backsliding Laodiceans. By fulfilling this psychological need, these leaders maintain control as members grow dependent on the group for their identity and purpose.

So, when October 6 arrives and Jesus chooses a different date, Dave's followers will sit there like wind-up toy monkeys, clapping their hands in delight at the announcement of a new date.

Crackpot Prophet Claims A Catholic Priest Recognizes That He Holds All Of The Qualifications Of A Prophet

 

It was only a matter of time before our esteemed Bwana Bob Mzungu Thiel scoured the earth to find a Catholic theologian whose description of a prophet perfectly matches himself. Truly, no one on this planet is more qualified to claim the title of prophet than our Great Bwana!

In his blog post, he begins by criticizing Gerald Flurry, dismissing Flurry’s claim that his plagiarized book, Malachi’s Message, is the “little book” of Revelation.

PCG also claims:

Malachi’s Message is an unwritten part of The Book of Revelation…The Little Book is a prophetic section of The Book of Revelation (Gerald Flurry, Philadelphia Trumpet Sept./Oct. 1992, “The Little Book” article pg. 6,7).

The angel over the Laodicean era had the little book in his hand. One of his major responsibilities was to get the little book delivered.

The little book has seven thunders. The whole Bible is referred to as a book—not a “little book” (Ezekiel 2:9-10; Revelation 5:1-2). So this passage is not referring to the Bible. The little book is only a small portion of what John saw in the book of Revelation. … Notice, the angel “cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth” (verse 3). It is like a lion’s roar. It is a message that has one blast of thunder after another—a series of seven thunders. The little book has an image of terror! It is prophecy about catastrophe! (FLurry G. The Little Book. Copyright © 1995, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2016, 2019 Philadelphia Church of God) 

 

That is opposed with what Jesus said, “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book” (Revelation 22:18). PCG has claim to have added to the prophecies of Revelation. 

 

It’s quite ironic coming from the Great Bwana, whose outlandish biblical interpretations pile on so much extraneous fluff that they make Flurry look tame by comparison.

Our Great Bwana is visibly irked that Flurry and other COG leaders dare to claim prophetic status, when it’s abundantly clear to the entire world—or at least it should be—that Bwana Bob is THE ONE TRUE PROPHET!

He then eagerly expounds on a Catholic theologian who outlined the criteria for a prophet:

Regarding prophets, Roman Catholic priest Msgr. Charles Pope wrote the following:

Samuel was surely one of the most significant prophets of the Old Testament and lived at a critical time, as Israel shifted from the time of the judges to the time of the monarchy. Ultimately, it was he who would see Israel through the difficult time of Saul’s reign and prepare and anoint them for David’s kingship to follow. 

 

What, then, are some of the ways in which God prepares Samuel and every prophet (this means you) for mission? Consider these five. 

 

1. The CLOSENESS of a great Prophet – In the first reading, we find the young Samuel sleeping in the temple of the Lord. In those days, the temple was not yet in Jerusalem nor was it a permanent building; it was a tent structure in Hebron. Samuel, as one in training for temple duties, is sleeping near the Ark of the Covenant, which carried the presence of God. Thus we see that a great prophet begins and remains so by staying close to the Lord. 

 

We must do the same if we wish to be great prophets to our family and friends. How will parents give prophetic witness to their children if they are distant from the Lord? How will a priest preach with authority and power if he does not stay close to the Lord? 

 

How do we draw close to the Lord? Daily prayer, devout reading of Scripture, frequent confession, weekly reception of Holy Communion, and a spirit of wonder and awe. Ask for these virtues. Stay close to the Lord. Great prophets stay close to the Lord. 

 

2. The CONSTERNATION of a great Prophet – The first reading depicts Samuel as struggling with some confusion as to what he is hearing and from whom. God is calling, but Samuel doesn’t get it. He struggles to figure out what is happening to him. A look at the call of the great prophets reveals that most of them struggled with their call. Moses felt old, inarticulate, and inadequate. Jeremiah felt too young; Isaiah, too sinful. Amos would have been content to remain a dresser of sycamores. Most of the prophets felt overwhelmed and experienced consternation. 

 

Samuel eventually figures it out who it is that is calling him and begins his journey. He had to listen for a while to do that, however. 

 

How about you? Many of us too would want to run if God made it clear that He had something for us to do. In a way, that is a proper response, for pride is a bad trait. To be troubled, to experience a bit of consternation and anxiety, helps us to remain humble and to keep leaning on the Lord. 

 

What is the Lord asking of you? Perhaps, like Samuel, you struggle to understand at first. Stay close to God and things will eventually become clear. 

 

The great prophets struggled, but that is the point. They struggled with God for an answer and for a vision. 

 

3. The CONNECTEDNESS of a great Prophet – Notice that Samuel does not discern on his own. He seeks counsel from a wiser man. Although Eli is not a perfect teacher, God does make use of him to help Samuel. 

 

We, too, ought to seek good, strong spiritual influences, friends and clergy, to help us to discern. Scripture says, Seek counsel from every wise man (Tobit 4:18). It is a bad idea to try to discern alone. We should cultivate relationships with wise and spiritual men and women in our journey. 

 

The great prophets were connected to spiritual leaders and teachers. They read and consulted other prophets. God does not just call us to a vertical, private relationship with Him. He also calls us to a horizontal relationship with others. Seek wise counsel—great prophets do. 

 

4. The CORE of a great Prophet – Samuel is advised by Eli to say to God, Speak, Lord, for your servant is listening. A great prophet listens to God, but God does not always say easy things. He often challenges, but great prophets listen very carefully to Him. They do not try to bury His word; they do not forget what He says. They take what they hear seriously and do not compromise God’s Word. 

 

What about us? It is easy to avoid listening to God or to compromise what we have heard, but great prophets listen carefully to Him by doing these things: reading and studying His word, observing how He speaks through creation and in the events of each day, studying the teachings of the Church, and listening to the small, still voice within carefully and prayerfully. 

 

Do you want to be a great prophet? Then listen. 

 

5. The CAPABILITY of a great Prophet – We see in Samuel’s life how was gradually transformed into a great prophet of God who never compromised God’s word. The text says, Samuel grew up, and the LORD was with him, not permitting any word of his to be without effect. 01/16/21  A Picture of a Prophet – A Homily for the Second Sunday of the Year 

 

Behold, the Great Bwana Bob meets every qualification of a true prophet! Bow before the magnificent Bob and gaze in awe at his divine splendor! Tragically, nearly all COG members are too blind to recognize that the Great Bob is the earthly embodiment of a godly prophet! Shame on them!

He continues by smearing other COG groups:

Because of false prophets in a couple of COG-related groups (including PCG) and a disbelief in prophets by most of the COG groups, the non-Philadelphian COGs have a lot of severe prophetic misunderstandings. 

 

Remember that the Bible teaches:

7 Surely the Lord God does nothing, Unless He reveals His secret to His servants the prophets. ( Amos 3:7) 

 

So in the last days, groups who do not believe there are prophets or those who listen to false prophets will not understand.

One thing that I have noticed is that the Laodicean Christians, as well as those of the Sardis Church, misunderstand end time prophecy. 

 

Bwana Bob proceeds to roll out his 55-point list (which I am not posting here), gleefully brandished to debunk all COG leaders and cement his claim as the ONE AND ONLY true prophet of the church today. No joke!

It still infuriates the Great Bwana to no end that Rod Meredith, the Living Church of God, and the United Church of God utterly failed to acknowledge his unparalleled greatness. Blinded by their ignorance, they’ll miss the memo on when to flee to the desolate refuge in Jordan, where Bwana Bob will reign supreme.

It should be noted that leaders in the Living Church of God and/or the United Church of God confirmed to me personally that I was biblically correct on pretty much all the above points (there were some I did not discuss with them), despite the fact that their respective churches hold to several of the errors pointed out above. Those who rely too much on a compromised ministry (Ezekiel 34:7-10) to teach them prophecy that is not truly in accordance with scripture need to realize that according to Jesus’ words in Revelation 2 & 3 and Luke 21, only relatively few Christians will be protected from the hour of trial that will come upon the whole world. 

 

There are also more prophetic differences that other COG groups have from the Bible. The reality is that without the right emphasis on the final phase of the work, holding the Bible in sufficiently high regard, practicing Philadelphian love, and ignoring one anointed like Elisha, the COG groups that ignore prophetic warnings are doing so to their peril.

Unless you repent and align with the One True Bob and his extraordinary church, you’ll be left unprotected during the Great Tribulation, which he fervently longs to see devastate the world around him—especially those idle Laodiceans who dare refuse to bow to his magnificence.

Without repentance, those who hold to certain of the listed errors will NOT be protected from the coming Great Tribulation (Matthew 24:21) as they will not even know when it will begin until it has already started. 

 

While some discount prophecy, notice what Jesus admonished His faithful to do:

35 For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. 36 Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man. (Luke 21:35-36)

We can all sleep soundly tonight and for the next 5, 10, or 25 years, knowing with certainty that the Great Bwana Bob is a liar and a false prophet, and no true Christian would ever follow him.

Disfellowshipment and Marking: The Tools Of Oppression and Fear in the Church of God

 

Disfellowshipment and marking are practices rooted in biblical teachings, particularly in the Church of God and similar denominations, aimed at maintaining the spiritual purity and unity of the congregation. These practices, however, have been perceived by some as tools of oppression due to their social and emotional impact. Below, I explore why these practices were sometimes viewed as fearful within the Church of God, drawing on biblical principles, historical context, and social dynamics.

Biblical Basis and Purpose

Disfellowshipment and marking stem from New Testament directives to address unrepentant sin or divisive behavior within the church. Key scriptures include: 

 

Matthew 18:15-17: Jesus outlines a process for addressing a brother's sin, culminating in treating an unrepentant person "as a Gentile and a tax collector" if they refuse correction.

1 Corinthians 5:5, 11: Paul instructs the Corinthian church to "deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh" and to avoid associating with a brother who persists in sins like sexual immorality, greed, or idolatry. 

 

Romans 16:17: Paul urges the church to "mark" those who cause divisions or offenses contrary to doctrine and to avoid them. 

 

2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14-15: Believers are commanded to withdraw from those who walk disorderly but to admonish them as brothers, not enemies. 

 

In the Church of God, these practices were seen as protective measures to:

Encourage repentance (1 Corinthians 5:5, 2 Corinthians 2:6-8). 

 

Protect the congregation from the spread of sin or false teaching (1 Corinthians 5:6-7). 

 

Preserve the church’s reputation before the world (1 Timothy 6:1). 

 

The intent was to foster holiness and accountability, not to punish for punishment’s sake. Though in many cases that is exactly what it was done for, particularly in the Philadelphia Church of God and the Restored Church of God

Why These Practices Were Feared

Despite their biblical grounding, disfellowshipment and marking evoked fear and be perceived as a tool of oppression for several reasons:

 

Social Isolation 

 

Loss of Community: In tight-knit Church of God congregations, fellowship was a core aspect of spiritual and social life (Philippians 1:27). Disfellowshipment often meant a complete or near-complete cutoff from social interactions with church members, including family and friends. Paul’s instruction in 1 Corinthians 5:11 to “not even eat” with such a person emphasized this separation, which could be emotionally devastating. 

 

Public Marking: Marking, as described in Romans 16:17, involved publicly identifying someone as a threat to the church’s unity or doctrine. This could lead to public shame and ostracism, amplifying the sense of rejection. For example, announcements like “Mr. John Doe has been marked for cause” were sometimes made during services, making the individual’s status known to the congregation. 

 

Impact on Family and Friends: The obligation to avoid social contact extended to close relationships, creating tension and emotional pain. Members were taught to prioritize spiritual purity over personal ties, which could feel like betrayal or abandonment (2 Thessalonians 3:15). 

 

Spiritual Consequences

Perceived Loss of Salvation: In some Church of God teachings, disfellowshipment was framed as being “delivered to Satan” (1 Corinthians 5:5), implying a temporary removal from God’s protection. For believers who viewed the church as the “called-out body of Christ,” this could feel like a direct threat to their spiritual standing or salvation, even if the intent was to prompt repentance. 

 

Restricted Participation: Disfellowshipped members often faced restrictions on participating in sacred practices, such as taking Passover or attending certain church events. In the Church of God, where these rituals are central to spiritual identity, exclusion could feel like a profound spiritual punishment. 

 

Lack of Transparency and Consistency

Subjective Application: The decision to disfellowship or mark was often at the discretion of church leaders, such as ministers or elders. Without clear, universal guidelines, these decisions could appear arbitrary or biased, leading to perceptions of unfairness. For example, some members felt disciplined for minor infractions or doctrinal disagreements, while others were overlooked. 

 

Confidentiality vs. Public Shame: While some disfellowshipments were kept confidential, others were announced publicly, especially for widely known transgressions or to warn the congregation of a perceived threat. This inconsistency could heighten fear, as members might not know whether their discipline would remain private or become a public spectacle. 

 

Potential for Abuse: Critics, including former members, have noted that disfellowshipment could be used to silence dissent or enforce strict compliance. For instance, disagreements over doctrine or church practices could lead to marking or disfellowshipment, as seen in cases where members questioned leadership or explored different interpretations of scripture.

 Emotional and Psychological Impact

Shame and Stigma: The public nature of marking or announcements about disfellowshipment could lead to feelings of shame, particularly in small, close communities. Members feared being labeled as “disorderly” or “divisive,” which could damage their reputation and relationships.

Fear of Judgment: The process often involved confrontations with church leaders, which could feel intimidating. The requirement to confess sins or face a disciplinary council added pressure, especially for younger members or those already struggling with guilt.

Loss of Identity: For many in the Church of God, membership was a core part of their identity. Being disfellowshipped or marked could feel like losing one’s place in the “household of God” (Ephesians 2:19), leading to existential fear and alienation. 

 

Historical and Cultural Context in the Church of God

The Church of God, placed a strong emphasis on doctrinal purity and obedience to biblical commands. This was partly due to their Restorationist roots, which sought to return to New Testament practices. The fear associated with disfellowshipment and marking was amplified by: 

 

Hierarchical Structure: The Church of God often operated with strong ministerial authority, where leaders were seen as “judges in Israel”. This gave significant power to ministers, whose decisions could profoundly affect members’ lives. 

 

End-Time Beliefs: Many Church of God groups emphasized the imminent return of Christ and the need for holiness to be part of the “elect.” The threat of being excluded from the church could feel like being excluded from God’s kingdom, heightening fear. 

 

Community-Centric Culture: The church was often the center of members’ social and spiritual lives, especially in smaller congregations. Losing fellowship meant losing a support system, which could be particularly traumatic in isolated or rural settings. 

 

Critiques and Perceptions of Oppression

Former members and critics have described disfellowshipment and marking as oppressive due to:

Perceived Cruelty: Some felt the practices were applied harshly, without sufficient regard for individual circumstances. For example, a teenage girl disfellowshipped at 14 for a moral infraction reported feeling shamed and worthless, with long-lasting emotional scars. 

 

Silencing Dissent: In some cases, disfellowshipment was used to address not just moral sins but also doctrinal disagreements or questioning of church authority. This led to accusations that the practices were tools to enforce conformity rather than foster repentance. 

 

Lack of Restoration: While the biblical goal was restoration (2 Corinthians 2:7-8), some members felt that the path back to fellowship was unclear or overly punitive, leaving them permanently alienated. 

 

Counterperspective: Protective and Redemptive

Church leaders and defenders of the practice argue that disfellowshipment and marking were not meant to oppress but to protect and redeem:

Repentance as the Goal: The ultimate aim was to encourage the individual to repent and return to fellowship, as seen in Paul’s instructions to forgive and restore a repentant sinner (2 Corinthians 2:7-8).

Protection of the Church: By removing unrepentant sinners or divisive individuals, the church sought to maintain its holiness and prevent the spread of sin or false teaching (1 Corinthians 5:6-7). 

 

Love and Discipline: Discipline was framed as an act of love, akin to a parent correcting a child (Hebrews 12:6). Leaders were encouraged to act with humility and care, not pride or anger. 

 

Disfellowshipment and marking were fearful tools in the Church of God because they leveraged the power of social and spiritual exclusion in a community where fellowship was central to identity and salvation. The threat of isolation, shame, and perceived spiritual jeopardy created significant emotional and psychological pressure. While rooted in biblical principles aimed at repentance and church purity, the application of these practices sometimes lacked consistency, transparency, or compassion, leading to oppression. For some, the fear stemmed not from the practices themselves but from their potential for misuse or overly harsh implementation, particularly when they disrupted personal relationships or silenced honest inquiry.

David D