As mentioned last year, the government of Burundi changed their laws requirements for churches to be legally function and be registered there. Augustin Mpawenimana began the process for us.
Augustin Mpawenimana and Evans Ochieng
The laws now basically state that a church with a foreign connection must have at least 500 persons, land, and a building (and maybe multiple ones), in order to register so it can legally operate. This is something I started to speak with Aaron Dean of UCG about a couple of years ago. And we talked again about this on Monday after Augustin Mpawenimana sent me an updated email on the situation (Aaron Dean and I also discussed church history and some prophetic matters).
Like us, the United Church of God (UCG) has applied for official registration in Burundi, but still has not been approved (we have some type of temporary approval). If UCG gets some approval, then they are looking at how to meet whatever other requirements there may be. Aaron Dean told me that he would inform me when, and if, UCG gets its request for registration approved and I would tell him what is going on with the registration of the Continuing Church of God. He continues to believe that UCG should be able to cooperate with us in Burundi. As it turns out, UCG purchased land in Burundi a while back to assist its registration. He and I discussed the possibility of both groups providing some funding for building materials so the brethren from both COGs can construct a church building which both could use for services, etc.
We are NOT discussing any type of church merger, only how we may be able to cooperate so both churches will be able to legally function in Burundi. You may wish to pray about this.
Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before! With all the new crazy self-appointed Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars leading various Churches of God today, it is important to hold these agents of deception accountable.
Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web of Corrupt Leaders
- Contact Blog Owner No2HWA:
- Contact Dennis Diehl
- Who exactly was Herbert W Armstrong?
- DAVID C PACK: We Are In A Serious Dilemma! EVERYTHING I HAVE WRITTEN IS WRONG!
- Evaluating the Rumors about Herbert Armstrong and Incest
- Apostolic Treasures: The Treasures Of Herbert W Armstrong
- Bob Thiel: The Remarkable Story of The Mysterious ThD and Subtle Deceptions of Bob Thiel
- Wacky World of Dave Pack
- David C. Pack's Wacky World 2
- Mulling Things Over With Dennis Page 1
- "Mulling Things Over With Dennis" Page 2
- Mulling Things Over With Dennis Page 3
- Van Robison
- Idiots in the Pulpit
- Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web
- Armstrongism: Is It The Plain Truth? 8/5
- The Daughter of Babylon: A True History of the Workdwide Church of God
- The Armstrong Error Booklet
- Mr. Confusion 1971
- Book: The Truth Shall Make You Free
- UCG/COGWA Child Molester
- Rod Meredith HATES This Blog!
- PCG Suicide
- How Fred Dattalo, Cal Culpepper and Gerald Flurry Caused A PCG Suicide
- LCG Pedophiles
- Rod McNair Says Elderly Possessed By Demons
- Herbert Armstrong Confesses to Incest!
- Herbert Armstrong's Documented Prophecies By Decad...
- Worldwide Church of God vs. Philadelphia Church of God
- Pasadena Campus in 2019
- Ambassador College Pasadena Campus Demolition and ...
- Disclaimer
- Home
Sunday, June 14, 2026
Bob Thiel and Aaron Dean's Masterclass in Armstrongist Bureaucratic Fraud: When Two Tiny Personality Cults (UCG/CCOG) Team Up to Hoodwink an Entire Country
In a breathtaking display of theological flexibility, Bob Thiel has decided that the best way to get his microscopic Continuing Church of God registered in Burundi is to hold hands with the very group he spent years telling his followers was spiritually compromised. Because nothing screams “end-time remnant” quite like begging your former rivals for help meeting basic government paperwork requirements.
Burundi recently raised the bar for foreign-connected churches: they now need at least 500 members, land, and an actual building. Thiel’s operation apparently falls short on its own, so he’s turned to the United Church of God — the same organization many in his circle have long dismissed as “Laodicean.” UCG already owns land in the country and has some form of temporary approval. The two sides have been discussing pooling money to build a shared church building that both groups could use. Thiel was very careful to stress that this is not a merger. It’s just two completely separate churches conspiring to meet legal minimums together. How refreshingly honest.
This kind of opportunistic “cooperation” is textbook Armstrongism. For decades, groups in this movement have perfected the art of using manipulation and selective truth-telling to get what they want. When it suits the leadership, rival factions suddenly discover they’re “brethren” who should work together. When it doesn’t, they go right back to publicly branding each other as spiritually blind or even demonic. The goal is never genuine unity — it’s always institutional survival and the appearance of legitimacy. Members are kept in the dark or fed spiritual-sounding language while the men at the top quietly make deals that would make a corporate lawyer blush.
The same playbook is on full display here. Thiel and Aaron Dean can posture about “not merging” all they want, but the practical reality is two tiny American-led splinter groups desperately trying to combine their limited resources to trick a foreign government into giving them legal status. It’s the religious equivalent of two broke guys renting one tuxedo and showing up to a wedding pretending to be one respectable person. The only difference is that in Armstrongism, this kind of deception gets wrapped in layers of “God’s work” and “prophetic understanding” so the members feel spiritually obligated to support it.
Thiel even suggests people should “pray about this.” One assumes the prayer is that Burundian officials don’t look too closely at the actual numbers or ask awkward questions about why two groups that can barely stand each other suddenly need to share a building. In the grand tradition of Armstrongism, when manipulation and bureaucratic sleight-of-hand fail, there’s always prayer — preferably the kind that keeps the members docile while the leadership handles the real business of staying relevant.
It’s almost impressive how consistently these groups manage to turn even basic government registration into an exercise in creative deception. Two organizations that normally compete for the same small pool of followers are now discussing joint real estate investments in Africa, all while loudly insisting nothing has changed. Classic Armstrongism: the rules only apply until they become inconvenient, at which point “cooperation” magically appears — right up until the paperwork is approved.
Stay tuned. In the thrilling world of Church of God politics, today’s bitter rivals are tomorrow’s business partners, provided there’s a government form that needs filling out.
United Church of God: The Gospel of the Kingdom: Now Featuring Jesus as a Limited-Edition Bonus
Let’s set the scene from the United Church of God’s Council of Elders. They’re designing visitor packets, banners, and branded materials to “communicate who we are and what we do.” The top priority that emerges? Keeping the Sabbath and the Holy Days. That’s the thing they want front and center. Then Vik Kubik, bless his heart, has to gently remind everyone: “Hey, maybe we should also mention Jesus Christ and His importance in the plan of salvation.”
It’s the theological equivalent of planning a wedding and putting “We serve brisket on the correct days” on the invitations before remembering to put the groom’s name anywhere.
This isn’t an accident. This is Armstrongism working exactly as designed.
Herbert W. Armstrong built an entire religious system around the idea that mainstream Christianity had the wrong gospel. According to him, they were only preaching “a gospel about Christ” — His birth, death, and resurrection — while the real gospel was the good news of the Kingdom of God: a literal world government that would enforce God’s law on earth. In that framework, Jesus isn’t primarily the Savior you have a personal relationship with right now. He’s the future King who will return to set up that government and make everyone keep the Sabbath and Holy Days properly.
So when you’re designing outreach materials, what naturally comes out first? Not “Come meet Jesus.” It’s “We keep the Sabbath and Holy Days.” Because that’s the distinctive. That’s the sign. That’s how you know you’ve found the “true Church.” Jesus is important, sure — but He’s important because He’s going to make the whole world keep the law the way we already do.
This is why Armstrongism has always had a slightly allergic reaction to centering Jesus too much. If your entire identity is built on being the people who still obey the Old Testament commandments that everyone else supposedly abandoned, then leading with grace, the cross, or a relationship with the risen Christ feels dangerously close to sounding like those lawless Sunday-keeping Protestants, or worse yet, the Catholics. You can’t have visitors thinking this is just another Jesus church. You have to make sure they know this is the Sabbath-and-Holy-Days church that also happens to believe in Jesus.
That’s why the materials were shaping up to lead with the law. And that’s why Kubik had to play the role of the guy who raises his hand and says, “Should we maybe… put the actual Savior in there somewhere?” It’s the same instinct that makes Armstrongist groups spend far more time explaining why Christmas and Easter are pagan than explaining why the empty tomb changes everything.
In Armstrongism, Jesus mostly functions as:
- The one who died so your past sins could be forgiven (after which you’d better start keeping the law perfectly),
- The coming King who will enforce that law worldwide,
- And occasionally the “Lord of the Sabbath” (which conveniently lets them keep talking about the Sabbath).
He is rarely presented as the central, sufficient, personal object of faith and worship in the way evangelical Christianity does it. The focus stays on “God’s way of life” — which, in practice, means the commandments, the calendar, and the government. Jesus becomes the supporting cast in the story of the law being restored.
So when the Council of Elders sits down to create visitor packets and the first thing that comes out is “Sabbath and Holy Days,” they’re not being sloppy. They’re being consistent. The brand is the law. Jesus is the fine print you add when someone points out that maybe the fine print should be mentioned.
It’s almost charming in its predictability. Even when they’re trying to reach new people, the old Armstrongist reflexes kick in: lead with the distinctive commandment-keeping, and if someone notices the Son of God is missing from the brochure, just pencil Him in later.
Classic.
Puppet Strings and Proof-Texting: Why HWA's "Don't Believe Me, Believe Your Bible" Is Still Trapping New Covenant Believers
Don't Believe Me, Believe Your Bible!
The Armstrongist Magic Incantation That Wasn't So Magical After All
Herbert W. Armstrong loved this line. He trotted it out on radio, in The Plain Truth, in booklets, and from the pulpit like a holy incantation: "Don't believe me — believe your Bible!" Paired with the folksy "Blow the dust off your Bible" and the scriptural-sounding "Prove all things" (1 Thessalonians 5:21), it sounded so reasonable, so humble, so biblical. Who could argue with that? After all, the man was just a humble servant pointing people back to the Word, right?
Wrong. In the hands of Armstrongism, this wasn't an invitation to genuine, Spirit-led Bible study. It was the opening move in a sophisticated con — the theological equivalent of a used-car salesman saying, "Don't trust me, kick the tires yourself!" while the odometer has been rolled back and the engine is held together with prayer and duct tape.
The Setup: Sounding Humble While Seizing Control
The phrase worked because it disarmed skeptics. Mainstream Christianity was painted as paganized, deceived, and tradition-bound. Armstrong positioned himself as the no-nonsense voice crying in the wilderness: "The churches of this world won't tell you the truth — but your Bible will!" People who had grown up with vague sermons and feel-good religion suddenly felt empowered. They were being challenged to think, to study, to prove.
What they weren't told was that the "proving" came with an invisible owner’s manual: Armstrong’s booklets, his Plain Truth articles, his Bible Correspondence Course, and later the filtered interpretations of his ministers. The Bible was "plain," but apparently not plain enough without the special Armstrong decoder ring. British Israelism? Prove it from the Bible (using our genealogical charts and selective history). Tithing as a binding "financial law" for New Covenant Christians? Prove it (ignore Hebrews and the early church practice). The weekly Sabbath and annual Holy Days as required for salvation or identity? Prove it (while we quietly downplay or spiritualize other Old Covenant shadows we don't like).
The Bereans in Acts 17:11 were commended for searching the Scriptures daily to see if what Paul said was true. They examined with open minds. In Armstrongism, you examined — but only within the approved framework, often under the watchful eye of a local elder who could smell "Laodicean" or "rebellious" thinking from across the room. Independent cross-referencing with mainstream commentaries, church history, or Greek/Hebrew study aids? That was often viewed with suspicion. Why would you need those when "God's apostle" had already done the heavy lifting?
The Double Bind and the Selective Memory
Armstrong and his successors changed teachings over the decades — on divorce and remarriage, on makeup, on the nature of God, on healing, on a host of prophetic details. Yet the phrase "Don't believe me, believe your Bible" was still trotted out as if the system were static and infallible. When the changes came (especially the traumatic ones after Armstrong's death), suddenly "prove all things" became "stay loyal to the church" or "don't cause division." The same mouths that once shouted about blowing dust off Bibles now warned against "intellectual vanity" or "questioning God's government."
Exit stories from former members are littered with this pattern. People who actually took the challenge seriously — who kept studying after baptism and found the Bible didn't say what the booklet claimed — often ended up disfellowshipped or marked. The phrase that sounded like freedom became the trapdoor. You were free to "prove" it... as long as you arrived at the pre-approved conclusion. Disagree? Then you weren't really believing your Bible — you were being deceived by Satan, your own carnal mind, or "the world."
And the prophecies? Oh, the prophecies. Armstrong set dates, hinted at dates, and built an entire end-time scenario around his work and the "Philadelphia era." When they failed (repeatedly), the response wasn't "Maybe I was wrong — let's go back to the Bible together without my filter." It was often "The Bible is still true, the work continues, hold fast." The very Book he told people to believe apparently needed his ongoing reinterpretation to stay relevant.
The Deeper Deception: Bible as Weapon, Not Guide
At its core, the tactic inverts biblical authority. The Bible becomes a tool to confirm what the leader has already decided, rather than the supreme standard that can correct or rebuke the leader. This is classic high-control religion dressed in scriptural clothing. It flatters the convert's intelligence ("You're not like those blind followers in other churches — you checked!") while slowly transferring authority from the text (and the Holy Spirit) to the organization and its hierarchy.
It also creates a closed epistemological loop: The Bible is true. Armstrong (or his spiritual descendants) correctly interprets the Bible. Therefore, questioning Armstrong is questioning the Bible. Try escaping that without being accused of rejecting God Himself.
At its core, the tactic inverts biblical authority. The Bible becomes a tool to confirm what the leader has already decided, rather than the supreme standard that can correct or rebuke the leader. This is classic high-control religion dressed in scriptural clothing. It flatters the convert's intelligence ("You're not like those blind followers in other churches — you checked!") while slowly transferring authority from the text (and the Holy Spirit) to the organization and its hierarchy.
It also creates a closed epistemological loop: The Bible is true. Armstrong (or his spiritual descendants) correctly interprets the Bible. Therefore, questioning Armstrong is questioning the Bible. Try escaping that without being accused of rejecting God Himself.
The Real Danger for New Covenant Christians
This is where it gets especially toxic for those who have come to understand the freedom and sufficiency of the New Covenant in Christ.
The saying sounds pious, but in Armstrongist practice it often functions as a gateway drug back into Old Covenant bondage. It keeps sincere believers fixated on shadows — Sabbaths, Holy Days, tithing systems, clean meats, and "government" structures — as if these were the heart of Christian identity and obedience. Meanwhile, the blazing center of the New Covenant — the finished work of Christ, justification by faith apart from works of the law, the indwelling Spirit, and the liberty purchased at the cross — gets treated as secondary or even dangerous if it leads someone to question the "restored truths."
New Covenant believers are repeatedly warned in Scripture not to let anyone judge them in regard to Sabbaths, festivals, or food (Colossians 2:16-17), not to be entangled again with a yoke of bondage (Galatians 5:1), and that the law was a tutor to bring us to Christ, not a perpetual straitjacket (Galatians 3:24-25). Yet the Armstrongist use of "Don't believe me, believe your Bible" has a remarkable ability to make people feel spiritually superior for re-imposing those very shadows — and spiritually terrified of letting them go.
Worse, it trains people to outsource their discernment. Instead of growing into mature believers who can handle the Word rightly divided (2 Timothy 2:15), many remain perpetual students of the latest booklet or sermon from the current "leader." The next self-appointed "Zerubbabel," "Elijah," or "apostle" can step in with fresh "new truth" or recycled old errors, wave the same magic phrase, and the cycle repeats. The Bible becomes a ventriloquist dummy for whatever authoritarian personality currently holds the microphone.
Perhaps the greatest tragedy is what it does to the heart. New Covenant Christianity is meant to produce sons and daughters who walk in freedom, love, and the Spirit — not anxious rule-keepers scanning for the next doctrinal tweak or fearful of losing their salvation over a missed Holy Day or an unauthorized Bible study. The phrase, twisted this way, keeps people in a subtle form of spiritual slavery: outwardly zealous for "the truth," inwardly dependent on human mediators who claim to have unlocked what the Bible "really" says.
True biblical Christianity invites examination — but it doesn't fear it. It doesn't need to control the outcome or punish those who land in different places after honest study. It points people to Christ as the ultimate fulfillment of the Scriptures, not to any man or organization as the necessary filter.
So yes, blow the dust off your Bible. Read it. Study it. But do it without the Armstrongist training wheels, without the fear that independent conclusions will get you marked, and without the assumption that one man's (or one group's) "restored" system is the only possible faithful reading. The New Covenant is bigger, freer, and far more Christ-centered than any humanly constructed theological empire built on selective proof-texting and loyalty tests.
The man who kept telling people not to believe him built an awful lot of his authority on making sure they ultimately did. That's not humility. That's the oldest trick in the authoritarian playbook — and far too many sincere people are still falling for it.
This is where it gets especially toxic for those who have come to understand the freedom and sufficiency of the New Covenant in Christ.
The saying sounds pious, but in Armstrongist practice it often functions as a gateway drug back into Old Covenant bondage. It keeps sincere believers fixated on shadows — Sabbaths, Holy Days, tithing systems, clean meats, and "government" structures — as if these were the heart of Christian identity and obedience. Meanwhile, the blazing center of the New Covenant — the finished work of Christ, justification by faith apart from works of the law, the indwelling Spirit, and the liberty purchased at the cross — gets treated as secondary or even dangerous if it leads someone to question the "restored truths."
New Covenant believers are repeatedly warned in Scripture not to let anyone judge them in regard to Sabbaths, festivals, or food (Colossians 2:16-17), not to be entangled again with a yoke of bondage (Galatians 5:1), and that the law was a tutor to bring us to Christ, not a perpetual straitjacket (Galatians 3:24-25). Yet the Armstrongist use of "Don't believe me, believe your Bible" has a remarkable ability to make people feel spiritually superior for re-imposing those very shadows — and spiritually terrified of letting them go.
Worse, it trains people to outsource their discernment. Instead of growing into mature believers who can handle the Word rightly divided (2 Timothy 2:15), many remain perpetual students of the latest booklet or sermon from the current "leader." The next self-appointed "Zerubbabel," "Elijah," or "apostle" can step in with fresh "new truth" or recycled old errors, wave the same magic phrase, and the cycle repeats. The Bible becomes a ventriloquist dummy for whatever authoritarian personality currently holds the microphone.
Perhaps the greatest tragedy is what it does to the heart. New Covenant Christianity is meant to produce sons and daughters who walk in freedom, love, and the Spirit — not anxious rule-keepers scanning for the next doctrinal tweak or fearful of losing their salvation over a missed Holy Day or an unauthorized Bible study. The phrase, twisted this way, keeps people in a subtle form of spiritual slavery: outwardly zealous for "the truth," inwardly dependent on human mediators who claim to have unlocked what the Bible "really" says.
True biblical Christianity invites examination — but it doesn't fear it. It doesn't need to control the outcome or punish those who land in different places after honest study. It points people to Christ as the ultimate fulfillment of the Scriptures, not to any man or organization as the necessary filter.
So yes, blow the dust off your Bible. Read it. Study it. But do it without the Armstrongist training wheels, without the fear that independent conclusions will get you marked, and without the assumption that one man's (or one group's) "restored" system is the only possible faithful reading. The New Covenant is bigger, freer, and far more Christ-centered than any humanly constructed theological empire built on selective proof-texting and loyalty tests.
The man who kept telling people not to believe him built an awful lot of his authority on making sure they ultimately did. That's not humility. That's the oldest trick in the authoritarian playbook — and far too many sincere people are still falling for it.
Saturday, June 13, 2026
Precept Upon Precept, Clown Upon Clown: How Armstrongism Turned God’s Mockery Into Their Holy Study Method
But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. Isaiah 28:13
Ah, yes. The classic Armstrongist party trick. Whenever some wide-eyed prospective member or lingering splinter drone starts asking too many pesky questions about why the "one true church" cherry-picks doctrines like a starving raccoon in a dumpster, out comes the triumphant bellow: "Precept upon precept! Line upon line! Here a little, there a little!" It's their sacred get-out-of-context-free card, the magical incantation that justifies ripping verses from here, there, and everywhere to "prove" British Israelism, mandatory tithing to headquarters, triple tithes and offerings during "God's" feast days, the sacred calendar, clean/unclean meats, and whatever other Old Covenant legalism HWA and his prophetic successors decided was essential for salvation that week.
Let's actually open the Bible and see what Isaiah 28:9-13 says, shall we? (You know, the whole context thing that the "Philadelphia era" remnant claims to love so much.)
King James Version (because that's the one they prefer when it suits them):
Notice something? The phrases "precept upon precept" etc. are not a divine study method handed down from on high. They are the mocking taunt of drunken, scoffing priests and prophets in Ephraim (and by extension, Judah) who are ridiculing Isaiah's message. They're saying, in effect: "Who does this guy think he's teaching? Babies just weaned from the breast? Blah blah blah, rule on rule, line on line, a little here, a little there—yada yada yada." It's baby talk to their sophisticated, wine-soaked ears.
God is not patting them on the back for their systematic theology homework. He's pronouncing judgment. They rejected the true rest and refreshing found in Him (verse 12 — hello, New Covenant shadow), preferring their own religious game of collecting scattered proof-texts while ignoring the heart of the matter. As a result, the very words they mocked become a trap that causes them to stumble, fall backward, be broken, snared, and taken captive.
How Armstrongism Distorted It Masterfully
Herbert W. Armstrong and his theological descendants (Thiel, Pack, Flurry, Kitchen, Brisby, and the rest of the clown car) turned this passage of divine mockery and judgment into their primary hermeneutical operating system. "The Bible is a jigsaw puzzle! You have to put it together precept upon precept, here a little there a little!" they'd thunder from the pulpit, while conveniently ignoring that the passage is God describing how the unrepentant stumble over His word precisely because of that fragmented, rules-focused approach without the Spirit.
This "method" gave them unlimited license to:
The Real Point They Missed (Because It Would Bankrupt Their Empire)
Verse 12 is the heart:
Sound familiar? Jesus said, "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:28). The New Covenant isn't about mastering scattered precepts through human effort and headquarters-approved Bible studies. It's about faith in the finished work of Christ, the true Cornerstone (Isaiah 28:16, right in the same chapter they love to twist).
The Armstrongist approach — endless rule-stacking, fear of "falling away" if you miss a Holy Day, financial extraction disguised as "God's government," and spiritual exhaustion — is the exact opposite of rest. It's the path that leads to being "broken, and snared, and taken." Just look at the devastated lives, failed prophecies, scandals, and shrinking congregations across the splinters. The trap worked exactly as Isaiah described.
Congratulations, COG leaders! You've taken a passage where God mocks religious know-it-alls who treat His word like a rulebook for toddlers and turned it into your infallible method for reinventing Judaism with a thin coat of "Church of God" paint. Precept upon precept indeed — mostly the precepts of men that make the word of God of none effect (Mark 7:13, another verse they probably "here a little" away from).
If you're in one of these groups and feeling weary, exhausted, and spiritually snared... maybe stop treating the Bible like a drunken scoffer’s puzzle and listen to what God actually said about rest. The refreshing is available in Christ, not in another "special" Bible study booklet from Wadsworth, Grover Beach, Edmond, or wherever the latest self-appointed Elijah is holed up.
The word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept... that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken.
New Covenant Christians must grasp this passage not as a clever study tip, but as a stark warning against the very snare that trapped generations in Armstrongism. The "precept upon precept" approach, when stripped of its sarcastic biblical context, becomes a self-perpetuating system of spiritual bondage—piecing together isolated rules while missing the grand tapestry of grace fulfilled in Jesus. It keeps believers perpetually weaned from the true milk of the Word, treating Scripture as a divine puzzle only "God's government" can solve, rather than a living revelation pointing to rest in Christ.
In light of Armstrong's distortions, believers today are called to reject this fragmented legalism entirely. The New Covenant, sealed by the blood of the Lamb, frees us from the exhaustive labor of reassembling Old Covenant shadows. No more hunting "here a little, there a little" for justification through diet, days, or dollars. Instead, we stand on the solid Cornerstone, where the weary find genuine refreshing—not in headquarters-approved booklets or self-appointed apostles, but in the finished work of the Cross. This understanding dismantles the fear tactics and control mechanisms that thrive on confusion, replacing them with the simplicity of faith, love, and liberty in the Spirit. No one needs Bob Thiel, Dave Pack, Gerald Weston, Gerald Flurry telling them jus how things are supposed to be.
Ultimately, Isaiah 28 exposes how religious elites stumble when they mock God's offer of rest. For those emerging from Armstrongist shadows, this means embracing the full implications of the New Covenant: no more hybrid law-grace systems, no more "one true church" elitism, and no more exhaustion masquerading as obedience. True doctrine flows not from puzzle-solving prowess, but from relationship with the One who is our Sabbath rest. As you study Scripture, do so with eyes fixed on Christ—the refreshing that the scoffers rejected. In doing so, you avoid the trap, walk in freedom, and become a voice of clarity for others still entangled in the wreckage of failed prophecies and man-made empires. The rest is not only better; it is the very gospel itself.
Let's actually open the Bible and see what Isaiah 28:9-13 says, shall we? (You know, the whole context thing that the "Philadelphia era" remnant claims to love so much.)
King James Version (because that's the one they prefer when it suits them):
9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. 10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: 11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. 12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. 13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.
Notice something? The phrases "precept upon precept" etc. are not a divine study method handed down from on high. They are the mocking taunt of drunken, scoffing priests and prophets in Ephraim (and by extension, Judah) who are ridiculing Isaiah's message. They're saying, in effect: "Who does this guy think he's teaching? Babies just weaned from the breast? Blah blah blah, rule on rule, line on line, a little here, a little there—yada yada yada." It's baby talk to their sophisticated, wine-soaked ears.
God is not patting them on the back for their systematic theology homework. He's pronouncing judgment. They rejected the true rest and refreshing found in Him (verse 12 — hello, New Covenant shadow), preferring their own religious game of collecting scattered proof-texts while ignoring the heart of the matter. As a result, the very words they mocked become a trap that causes them to stumble, fall backward, be broken, snared, and taken captive.
How Armstrongism Distorted It Masterfully
Herbert W. Armstrong and his theological descendants (Thiel, Pack, Flurry, Kitchen, Brisby, and the rest of the clown car) turned this passage of divine mockery and judgment into their primary hermeneutical operating system. "The Bible is a jigsaw puzzle! You have to put it together precept upon precept, here a little there a little!" they'd thunder from the pulpit, while conveniently ignoring that the passage is God describing how the unrepentant stumble over His word precisely because of that fragmented, rules-focused approach without the Spirit.
This "method" gave them unlimited license to:
- Proof-text their way to British Israelism by yanking obscure verses about ancient tribes and slapping them onto modern Anglo-Saxon nations. Never mind the mountains of genetic, historical, and archaeological evidence against it.
- Reimpose the Old Covenant (or their mutated version of it) on New Covenant believers. Tithing? Check. Holy Days? Check. Dietary laws? Check. Sabbath policing? Double check. All while Jesus and the Apostles made it clear the shadows have been fulfilled in Christ.
- Dodge the plain teaching of Scripture on grace, faith, and rest in Christ. Why deal with the finished work of the Cross when you can hopscotch through 66 books looking for supporting snippets?
- Maintain control. If everything is "here a little, there a little," only the enlightened Apostle or his chosen successor can properly assemble the puzzle. Question the assembly? You're a Laodicean, rebellious, or worse.
The Real Point They Missed (Because It Would Bankrupt Their Empire)
Verse 12 is the heart:
This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.
Sound familiar? Jesus said, "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:28). The New Covenant isn't about mastering scattered precepts through human effort and headquarters-approved Bible studies. It's about faith in the finished work of Christ, the true Cornerstone (Isaiah 28:16, right in the same chapter they love to twist).
The Armstrongist approach — endless rule-stacking, fear of "falling away" if you miss a Holy Day, financial extraction disguised as "God's government," and spiritual exhaustion — is the exact opposite of rest. It's the path that leads to being "broken, and snared, and taken." Just look at the devastated lives, failed prophecies, scandals, and shrinking congregations across the splinters. The trap worked exactly as Isaiah described.
Congratulations, COG leaders! You've taken a passage where God mocks religious know-it-alls who treat His word like a rulebook for toddlers and turned it into your infallible method for reinventing Judaism with a thin coat of "Church of God" paint. Precept upon precept indeed — mostly the precepts of men that make the word of God of none effect (Mark 7:13, another verse they probably "here a little" away from).
If you're in one of these groups and feeling weary, exhausted, and spiritually snared... maybe stop treating the Bible like a drunken scoffer’s puzzle and listen to what God actually said about rest. The refreshing is available in Christ, not in another "special" Bible study booklet from Wadsworth, Grover Beach, Edmond, or wherever the latest self-appointed Elijah is holed up.
The word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept... that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken.
New Covenant Christians must grasp this passage not as a clever study tip, but as a stark warning against the very snare that trapped generations in Armstrongism. The "precept upon precept" approach, when stripped of its sarcastic biblical context, becomes a self-perpetuating system of spiritual bondage—piecing together isolated rules while missing the grand tapestry of grace fulfilled in Jesus. It keeps believers perpetually weaned from the true milk of the Word, treating Scripture as a divine puzzle only "God's government" can solve, rather than a living revelation pointing to rest in Christ.
In light of Armstrong's distortions, believers today are called to reject this fragmented legalism entirely. The New Covenant, sealed by the blood of the Lamb, frees us from the exhaustive labor of reassembling Old Covenant shadows. No more hunting "here a little, there a little" for justification through diet, days, or dollars. Instead, we stand on the solid Cornerstone, where the weary find genuine refreshing—not in headquarters-approved booklets or self-appointed apostles, but in the finished work of the Cross. This understanding dismantles the fear tactics and control mechanisms that thrive on confusion, replacing them with the simplicity of faith, love, and liberty in the Spirit. No one needs Bob Thiel, Dave Pack, Gerald Weston, Gerald Flurry telling them jus how things are supposed to be.
Ultimately, Isaiah 28 exposes how religious elites stumble when they mock God's offer of rest. For those emerging from Armstrongist shadows, this means embracing the full implications of the New Covenant: no more hybrid law-grace systems, no more "one true church" elitism, and no more exhaustion masquerading as obedience. True doctrine flows not from puzzle-solving prowess, but from relationship with the One who is our Sabbath rest. As you study Scripture, do so with eyes fixed on Christ—the refreshing that the scoffers rejected. In doing so, you avoid the trap, walk in freedom, and become a voice of clarity for others still entangled in the wreckage of failed prophecies and man-made empires. The rest is not only better; it is the very gospel itself.
"Except the Lord Build the House…” — Unless Herbert’s the One Holding the Hammer
Herbert Armstrong’s Dream of Dominion: Why His “Church of God” Article Is Theologically Rotten
In September 1980, Herbert W. Armstrong published a piece in Good News magazine titled “Shall We All Leave THE CHURCH OF GOD and join ‘THE CHURCH OF PEOPLE’?” It opens with a dream. Yes, a literal dream. Armstrong wakes up one morning convinced that God has personally revealed to him why dissenters are bad: they want democracy. They want a say. They want to vote on leaders and doctrine. How dare they?
If that sounds like a man clutching his throne a little too tightly, that’s because it is. The entire article is a masterclass in theological sleight-of-hand, Old Testament cosplay, and self-justifying authoritarianism. It’s not just bad theology—it’s the kind of bad theology that turns a spiritual body into a personality cult and calls it “God’s government.”
The Apostle Who Appointed Himself (And Jesus Was Apparently Cool With It)
Armstrong’s central claim is as bold as it is unbiblical: this is God’s Church, run exclusively through “His chosen apostle”—that is, Herbert W. Armstrong himself. Christ is the Head, sure, but only in theory. In practice, Jesus works through one specially prepared, divinely guided man at the top. Anyone who suggests that the people should have input is accused of trying to evict God from His own house and turn it into a “church of the people.”
Because nothing screams “humble servant leadership” like declaring yourself the modern Moses while everyone else is just a sheep who needs to stop bleating.
Armstrong’s central claim is as bold as it is unbiblical: this is God’s Church, run exclusively through “His chosen apostle”—that is, Herbert W. Armstrong himself. Christ is the Head, sure, but only in theory. In practice, Jesus works through one specially prepared, divinely guided man at the top. Anyone who suggests that the people should have input is accused of trying to evict God from His own house and turn it into a “church of the people.”
Because nothing screams “humble servant leadership” like declaring yourself the modern Moses while everyone else is just a sheep who needs to stop bleating.
The New Testament begs to differ—loudly. Christ alone is the Head of the church (Ephesians 1:22; Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 5:23). The foundational apostles completed their unique, eyewitness role two thousand years ago; the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20; see also Acts 1:21-22; 1 Corinthians 9:1). There is no biblical category for a 20th-century “apostle” who gets to dictate doctrine worldwide while comparing himself to David and Moses in the same breath. New Testament churches were led by plural elders—local, accountable teams—not a single global potentate (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5; 1 Timothy 3:1-7; 1 Peter 5:1-5). Peter called himself a “fellow elder,” not the CEO of Christ Inc. (1 Peter 5:1). Armstrong’s model isn’t apostolic; it’s imperial.
To prop up his pyramid scheme, Armstrong drags out the greatest hits of Old Testament hierarchy: God choosing David over Jesse’s strapping older sons (1 Samuel 16:6-13), Moses leading Israel through the Red Sea, and—his favorite—Korah’s rebellion (Numbers 16:1-3). Those 1974 ministers who wanted more accountability? Straight-up Korahs, apparently.
Old Testament Cosplay Meets New Covenant Reality
To prop up his pyramid scheme, Armstrong drags out the greatest hits of Old Testament hierarchy: God choosing David over Jesse’s strapping older sons (1 Samuel 16:6-13), Moses leading Israel through the Red Sea, and—his favorite—Korah’s rebellion (Numbers 16:1-3). Those 1974 ministers who wanted more accountability? Straight-up Korahs, apparently.
Covetous. Power-hungry. Doomed.
Here’s the problem: the church is not ancient Israel. The New Testament isn’t a reboot of the theocracy. We’re not under a national covenant with a human mediator standing between God and us. Every believer is a priest with direct access to the Father (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10). The Holy Spirit indwells the whole body, not just the guy at headquarters (1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Romans 8:9; John 14:16-17). Even the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 involved “the whole church” weighing in alongside the apostles and elders (Acts 15:22). There’s accountability. There’s plurality. There’s—gasp—discussion. The church is to practice mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21) and test everything against Scripture (1 John 4:1; Isaiah 8:20).
Armstrong treats any hint of congregational input as rebellion against God Himself. That’s not theology; that’s a rhetorical kill switch. Disagree with the apostle? You’re not having a reasonable disagreement—you’re “leaving God out of the picture.” Classic move. Works great if your goal is control. Works terribly if your goal is actually following Scripture.
Here’s the problem: the church is not ancient Israel. The New Testament isn’t a reboot of the theocracy. We’re not under a national covenant with a human mediator standing between God and us. Every believer is a priest with direct access to the Father (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10). The Holy Spirit indwells the whole body, not just the guy at headquarters (1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Romans 8:9; John 14:16-17). Even the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 involved “the whole church” weighing in alongside the apostles and elders (Acts 15:22). There’s accountability. There’s plurality. There’s—gasp—discussion. The church is to practice mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21) and test everything against Scripture (1 John 4:1; Isaiah 8:20).
Armstrong treats any hint of congregational input as rebellion against God Himself. That’s not theology; that’s a rhetorical kill switch. Disagree with the apostle? You’re not having a reasonable disagreement—you’re “leaving God out of the picture.” Classic move. Works great if your goal is control. Works terribly if your goal is actually following Scripture.
When a Dream Becomes Doctrine
The whole piece kicks off with Armstrong’s vivid dream about young men lobbying against him. He wakes up “considerably impressed,” convinced God is showing him that too many members secretly want to run things their way. From there, it’s off to the races: proof-texts, historical revisionism, and dire warnings about “liberalism.”
Look, dreams can be memorable. They can even be meaningful. But when a leader’s nocturnal brain activity becomes the launchpad for an article on church government, you’ve officially left “sola scriptura” in the dust. The Bible is supposed to be sufficient for doctrine, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17; see also 1 Corinthians 4:6—“Do not go beyond what is written”). Not “Scripture plus whatever Herbert dreamed last Tuesday.” This is how cults get their operating manual—personal revelation dressed up as divine insight that just so happens to affirm the leader’s power.
The whole piece kicks off with Armstrong’s vivid dream about young men lobbying against him. He wakes up “considerably impressed,” convinced God is showing him that too many members secretly want to run things their way. From there, it’s off to the races: proof-texts, historical revisionism, and dire warnings about “liberalism.”
Look, dreams can be memorable. They can even be meaningful. But when a leader’s nocturnal brain activity becomes the launchpad for an article on church government, you’ve officially left “sola scriptura” in the dust. The Bible is supposed to be sufficient for doctrine, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17; see also 1 Corinthians 4:6—“Do not go beyond what is written”). Not “Scripture plus whatever Herbert dreamed last Tuesday.” This is how cults get their operating manual—personal revelation dressed up as divine insight that just so happens to affirm the leader’s power.
The Great Purge and the Peace That Followed (According to Him)
Armstrong gleefully recounts how the 1974 “men of renown” who tried to take over were booted out. The offshoots they started? All doomed to fail because “except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain” (Psalm 127:1). The troublemakers left? Peace at last! The remaining members? Finally free of those pesky dissenters.
Translation: If you question the apostle, you’re bitter, revenge-seeking, and probably going to hell in a handbasket. If you stay loyal, you get peace, growth, and God’s blessing. It’s spiritual gaslighting wrapped in a Psalm 127 bow—while conveniently ignoring Jesus’ actual instructions for church discipline: private confrontation, then witnesses, then the whole church (Matthew 18:15-17), not mass excommunication for questioning authority.
History, of course, had other plans. The Worldwide Church of God eventually repudiated much of Armstrong’s theology after his death. The “liberals” weren’t the problem; the rigid, extra-biblical system was. But in 1980, none of that mattered. Loyalty to the man trumped loyalty to the text.
Armstrong gleefully recounts how the 1974 “men of renown” who tried to take over were booted out. The offshoots they started? All doomed to fail because “except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain” (Psalm 127:1). The troublemakers left? Peace at last! The remaining members? Finally free of those pesky dissenters.
Translation: If you question the apostle, you’re bitter, revenge-seeking, and probably going to hell in a handbasket. If you stay loyal, you get peace, growth, and God’s blessing. It’s spiritual gaslighting wrapped in a Psalm 127 bow—while conveniently ignoring Jesus’ actual instructions for church discipline: private confrontation, then witnesses, then the whole church (Matthew 18:15-17), not mass excommunication for questioning authority.
History, of course, had other plans. The Worldwide Church of God eventually repudiated much of Armstrong’s theology after his death. The “liberals” weren’t the problem; the rigid, extra-biblical system was. But in 1980, none of that mattered. Loyalty to the man trumped loyalty to the text.
The Real Theological Crime
At its core, Armstrong’s article defends a closed system: one true church, one true apostle, one true set of doctrines (many of which were novel inventions). Any move toward grace, accountability, or biblical nuance was labeled “watering down God’s truth.” The result? A church that looked less like the vibrant, Spirit-led body in Acts and more like a tightly controlled corporation with a prophet at the top.
Jesus warned against this exact spirit: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them… It shall not be so among you” (Matthew 20:25-28; see also Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-26). Elders are to shepherd willingly, not as overlords (1 Peter 5:2-3). Armstrong’s article doesn’t just miss that verse. It drives a truck over it while shouting, “But I’m the apostle!”
So yes, the piece is theologically bad. Not mildly misguided—catastrophically so. It replaces Christ’s headship with a man’s (Colossians 2:19), Scripture’s authority with a dream’s, and servant leadership with top-down dominion. It’s the kind of writing that makes you wonder if the real question isn’t “Shall we all leave the Church of God?” but rather, “When did the Church of God start looking so much like the Church of Herbert?”
Thankfully, the real church of God—the one Jesus actually built—has always been bigger than any one man’s dream. It survives bad articles, bad governance, and even worse theology. Because at the end of the day, the vine is Christ (John 15:5). The branches are us. And no self-appointed apostle gets to prune that.
Silent Pilgrim
At its core, Armstrong’s article defends a closed system: one true church, one true apostle, one true set of doctrines (many of which were novel inventions). Any move toward grace, accountability, or biblical nuance was labeled “watering down God’s truth.” The result? A church that looked less like the vibrant, Spirit-led body in Acts and more like a tightly controlled corporation with a prophet at the top.
Jesus warned against this exact spirit: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them… It shall not be so among you” (Matthew 20:25-28; see also Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-26). Elders are to shepherd willingly, not as overlords (1 Peter 5:2-3). Armstrong’s article doesn’t just miss that verse. It drives a truck over it while shouting, “But I’m the apostle!”
So yes, the piece is theologically bad. Not mildly misguided—catastrophically so. It replaces Christ’s headship with a man’s (Colossians 2:19), Scripture’s authority with a dream’s, and servant leadership with top-down dominion. It’s the kind of writing that makes you wonder if the real question isn’t “Shall we all leave the Church of God?” but rather, “When did the Church of God start looking so much like the Church of Herbert?”
Thankfully, the real church of God—the one Jesus actually built—has always been bigger than any one man’s dream. It survives bad articles, bad governance, and even worse theology. Because at the end of the day, the vine is Christ (John 15:5). The branches are us. And no self-appointed apostle gets to prune that.
Silent Pilgrim
Crackpot Bob: Still Claiming to Be God’s Prophet While Acting Like a Petty, Vindictive Church Mob Boss
In recent online comments, critic Terry Nelson has sharply accused Bob Thiel, leader of the Continuing Church of God (CCOG), of directing efforts to pressure a woman named Priscilla (the ex-wife of one of Bob's so-called evangelists, into returning to her adulterous husband while simultaneously attempting to lure members and leaders away from the Hope of Israel Church of God (HOI COG), and COG7 through financial incentives.
According to Nelson, Thiel informed his small group of followers in a members-only post that he had sent two of his associates to locate Priscilla and compel her to reconcile with her husband, identified as Radson. The same individuals were also tasked with meeting leaders and members of the Hope of Israel Church of God in an effort to persuade them to leave that organization and join the CCOG, allegedly offering money and material goods as inducements.
Nelson stated that Thiel harbors deep animosity toward the Hope of Israel Church of God. He claimed Thiel had publicly signaled, through associate Radson, an intent to destroy the rival group. Nelson further alleged that Thiel announced plans to showcase leaders from the Hope of Israel Church of God whom the CCOG had successfully bribed. He referenced the Mulanji district, though an associate named Evans reportedly misspelled the location.
Nelson reported that three leaders—two men and the wife of a third—attended a meeting arranged by Thiel’s group. The individuals later expressed regret, stating they attended only because they had been invited. Nelson claimed these leaders were subsequently removed from their positions after it was discovered they had accepted substantial payments from Evans and Radson. He asserted that a photograph circulated by Thiel’s organization did not show an actual congregation but rather a private house gathering to which neighbors had been invited. Nelson concluded that Thiel is being deceived by con artists in these matters.
Nelson also accused Thiel of repeatedly harassing Priscilla. He stated that Priscilla personally informed Thiel of the facts but was ignored in favor of statements from what Nelson called Thiel’s “fake ministers.” According to Nelson, Thiel consistently rejects information that does not align with his preferred narrative. Nelson questioned Thiel’s rationality and mental state, described him as lacking common sense and empathy, and asked whether CCOG members could continue supporting such leadership. Nelson expressed relief that Priscilla is no longer associated with Radson or the CCOG, calling her separation from them a blessing.
The Dangers of Bob Thiel and His Heresies
The pattern of behavior described in Terry Nelson’s comments exposes serious risks inherent in following a leader who claims prophetic authority while demonstrating a consistent disregard for truth, individual rights, and basic ethical conduct. When a religious figure directs associates to pressure a woman into returning to an allegedly adulterous marriage against her stated wishes, it reveals a willingness to subordinate personal well-being and justice to organizational control. Such actions do not reflect pastoral care; they reflect coercion dressed in spiritual language.
Equally troubling is the reported use of financial bribes to recruit members from another church combined with an expressed desire to destroy a rival organization. This approach transforms ministry into a competitive power struggle rather than a pursuit of truth or spiritual growth. Leaders who resort to inducements and smear tactics erode trust within the broader Christian community and teach followers that ends justify unethical means.
A further danger lies in Thiel’s apparent refusal to accept direct testimony from Priscilla while readily believing associates whom Nelson describes as liars and con men. A self-proclaimed prophet who filters reality through a self-serving narrative creates an environment in which truth is secondary to loyalty. Followers in such a system learn to suppress doubts, ignore evidence, and defend questionable conduct, leaving them vulnerable to repeated manipulation and moral compromise.
Over time, these patterns point to deeper heresies beyond any specific doctrinal disputes. They reflect a fundamental inversion of Christian principles: the elevation of institutional power over the protection of the vulnerable, the substitution of control for compassion, and the dismissal of inconvenient truth in favor of a curated narrative. History demonstrates that religious movements led by individuals exhibiting these traits often produce damaged followers, fractured families, and lasting spiritual harm rather than genuine faith and freedom.
Those associated with Bob Thiel would do well to examine whether continued support for such leadership aligns with the values of justice, honesty, and care for the individual that true Christianity demands. The evidence presented in these comments suggests that the greatest danger may not lie in any single doctrine but in the character and methods of the man promoting them.
Here are screen shots of Bob's latest gaslighting go Priscilla.
Friday, June 12, 2026
The Untouchables: Armstrongist Edition — Because Nothing Says “True Church” Like Decades of Zero Accountability
Nathan Albright’s White Paper 9 is a devastatingly precise diagnosis of how elites in religious (and other) institutions become effectively untouchable. The mechanisms he describes—prestige shielding, elite networks, status preservation, and the resulting social environment of moral insulation—are not abstract sociology. They are the daily operating system of splinter groups today. What Albright analyzes in general terms plays out in real time in the Churches of God under self-appointed “leaders” like Bob Thiel, David C. Pack, Gerald Flurry, Ron Weinland, and their lesser imitators.
Prestige Shielding in the Splinters
Albright explains how accumulated reputation creates a perceptual shield: past “accomplishments” (or claimed ones) cause current misconduct to be interpreted charitably, with critics facing high social costs for speaking up.
In Armstrongism, this is on steroids. Herbert W. Armstrong’s prestige still blankets the entire movement decades after his death. Splinter leaders position themselves as his legitimate heirs, “restoring” what was lost, or receiving special revelations that HWA supposedly lacked. Bob Thiel (“Bwana Bob,” the Crackpot Prophet) constantly waves his claimed double portion and endless “dreams” as proof of divine appointment. David Pack claims to be the Elijah who would restore all things and has set dozens of failed dates for Christ’s return to Wadsworth, Ohio. Gerald Flurry claims to be “That Prophet” and possesses physical items tied to HWA.
The prestige shield works beautifully: hundreds of failed prophecies, documented scandals, financial exploitation, and authoritarian abuse are waved away as “attacks by Satan” or “persecution.” Members who invested years (or lifetimes) in these groups have a massive spiritual sunk-cost fallacy. To admit the leader is wrong is to admit their own sacrifices, broken families, and emptied bank accounts were for nothing. So the shield holds. Critics (including this blog) are dismissed as “bitter ex-members” or “tools of the devil,” exactly as Albright predicts.
Albright explains how accumulated reputation creates a perceptual shield: past “accomplishments” (or claimed ones) cause current misconduct to be interpreted charitably, with critics facing high social costs for speaking up.
In Armstrongism, this is on steroids. Herbert W. Armstrong’s prestige still blankets the entire movement decades after his death. Splinter leaders position themselves as his legitimate heirs, “restoring” what was lost, or receiving special revelations that HWA supposedly lacked. Bob Thiel (“Bwana Bob,” the Crackpot Prophet) constantly waves his claimed double portion and endless “dreams” as proof of divine appointment. David Pack claims to be the Elijah who would restore all things and has set dozens of failed dates for Christ’s return to Wadsworth, Ohio. Gerald Flurry claims to be “That Prophet” and possesses physical items tied to HWA.
The prestige shield works beautifully: hundreds of failed prophecies, documented scandals, financial exploitation, and authoritarian abuse are waved away as “attacks by Satan” or “persecution.” Members who invested years (or lifetimes) in these groups have a massive spiritual sunk-cost fallacy. To admit the leader is wrong is to admit their own sacrifices, broken families, and emptied bank accounts were for nothing. So the shield holds. Critics (including this blog) are dismissed as “bitter ex-members” or “tools of the devil,” exactly as Albright predicts.
Elite Networks and Mutual Protection
Albright describes dense webs of relationships among prominent figures that produce reciprocal protection—suppression of damaging information, favorable narratives, and mobilization of resources in defense of a member under scrutiny.
While Armstrongist groups are famously fragmented and often at war with each other, a functional elite network still operates. Leaders rarely call out each other’s false prophecies or abuses publicly (unless it serves to recruit members). There is a gentleman’s agreement of sorts: you don’t blow up my prophetic credibility and I won’t blow up yours. Insiders and ex-insiders know the quiet circulation of stories—Kenyan scandals in CCOG (adultery, witchcraft accusations, arrests, cover-ups involving named ministers like Evans Ochieng), RCG’s documented mind-control tactics and family destruction, PCG’s no-contact policies and financial austerity on members while the elite live comfortably, etc. Yet these rarely break into the broader “Church of God” consciousness in a way that threatens the system.
When a leader faces serious heat, the network (or sub-network) activates: loyal ministers issue character references, members are told to “pray for the leader,” and critics are isolated or disfellowshipped. The reciprocal expectation is clear—today I defend you, tomorrow you (or your allies) defend me.
Status Preservation and the Inner Circle
This may be the most powerful dynamic in the splinters. Albright notes that not just the leader, but spouses, children, staff, donors, board members, and protĂ©gĂ©s all have status, financial, vocational, and identity interests tied to the elite’s reputation. The pressure to suppress inconvenient truths becomes overwhelming.
Look at any major splinter. The leader’s family often occupies key positions. Long-time ministers and administrators have built entire careers (and retirements) around the group. Donors who have given “firstfruits,” tithes, and special offerings for decades cannot easily admit they were deceived. Young people raised in the system have their social world, marriage prospects, and identity wrapped up in it. The result is a thick layer of protective insulation. Information that leaks is minimized, contextualized, or attacked. The broader membership only hears the sanitized version.
Family dynamics add extra power here, as Albright notes with the Eli example. Loyalty to “God’s government” and “the family” become indistinguishable, making honest confrontation feel like betrayal of both.
The Social Environment of Insulation in Practice
In these groups, ordinary members live under one set of rules while the elite operate under another. Failed prophecies that would destroy credibility elsewhere are reframed as “tests of faith” or “God giving more time.” Abuses that would end careers in healthier churches are “God’s way of doing things.” Critics are not engaged on the merits; they are marginalized through the very mechanisms Albright describes.
The feedback loop is vicious: the leader hears mostly praise and filtered information from sycophants and dependents. He becomes genuinely convinced of his own specialness. The audience around him—shaped by the same environment—reinforces it. Consequential exposure is minimized through control of media, finances, and social connections. This is precisely why the splinters can persist despite decades of prophetic failure and documented harm.
Breaking the Cycle of Moral Insulation in Armstrongism
Nathan Albright’s sociological analysis shines a harsh but necessary light on why Armstrongist splinter groups remain trapped in patterns of elite exemption, failed prophecies, financial exploitation, and spiritual abuse despite decades of evidence. The prestige shielding around self-appointed leaders like Bob Thiel, David C. Pack, Gerald Flurry, and others is not unbreakable divine protection — it is a thoroughly human sociological construct built on sunk-cost fallacies, selective memory, and communal self-interest. When combined with elite networks and status-preservation incentives, it creates environments where ordinary moral evaluation is short-circuited, allowing the same cycles of wackiness and harm to repeat. Recognizing this as a systemic sociological problem, rather than merely a collection of bad actors, is the first step toward meaningful change.
Breaking prestige shielding requires deliberate, sustained refusal to participate in the protective perceptual framework. Individuals and communities must reject the automatic presumption of competence and good faith that past (or claimed) accomplishments grant. This means evaluating leaders by their present fruit — doctrinal accuracy, financial transparency, treatment of the vulnerable, and fidelity to Scripture — rather than by inherited HWA prestige, dramatic self-titles (“That Prophet,” Elijah, etc.), or emotional appeals to “God’s government.” Critics and concerned members must be willing to bear the social costs Albright describes: being labeled bitter, divisive, or satanic. As the prophets demonstrated, this often requires indirect approaches at first (parables, questions, documented timelines of failed predictions) before direct confrontation becomes possible. Persistent, factual documentation — exactly as this blog has done for years — chips away at the shield by making misconduct visible and impossible to filter out entirely.
On a broader scale, disrupting these dynamics demands the cultivation of alternative social environments and feedback channels outside the insulated networks. Former members, independent researchers, and those still inside who retain intellectual honesty can form or support loose networks that prioritize truth over group loyalty. This includes amplifying insider testimonies (such as the Kenyan CCOG scandals), cross-referencing leaders’ claims against verifiable history, and encouraging personal Bible study focused on the New Covenant rather than proof-texted legalism. Families and inner circles must wrestle with the Eli-like conflict: genuine love and loyalty cannot mean complicity in harm. Status interests — careers, retirements, identities — will always pull toward preservation, but individuals can realign them by counting the cost of continued participation in a system that devours its own.
Ultimately, the most powerful antidote to moral insulation in these groups is a return to biblical Christianity unfiltered by Armstrongist traditions. The New Covenant frees believers from the heavy yoke of human mediators and institutional prestige. Christ Himself confronted the insulated religious elites of His day without deference to their status or networks. When enough people — inside and out — insist that leaders be held to the same standards as everyone else, the perceptual shield weakens. The social environment shifts from protection to accountability. This will not happen through polite internal reform alone; it requires the prophetic courage Albright highlights and the persistent external pressure of sunlight.
The Armstrongist splinters have thrived on insulation for generations, but sociological constructs are not eternal. They crumble under sustained truth-telling, courageous exposure, and the quiet exodus of those who choose freedom in Christ over fear of man. The work continues — documenting, satirizing, appealing, and calling people to evaluate leaders by present conduct rather than borrowed glory. In the end, prestige that cannot withstand honest scrutiny was never worth shielding in the first place. Truth, by contrast, needs no such defenses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
