Another Religious Book Burner: This Time Any Bible That is NOT King James Version

Why are Baptist so incredibly weird?  Armstrongism almost appears sane next to some of these numbnut's.  This moron sounds just as incredibly stupid as Fred Phelps, another so called Baptist.  It's because of idiots like this that people are so disgusted with Christians!

Not only are they burning any Bible other than the KJV, they are burning the books of countless Christian writers.  Reading his press release on this silliness he comes across as not the brightest light bulb in Baptistdom.

The official church information is after the post below.

Another Book Burner Lusts for Attention

Post by Candace Chellew-Hodge

When Terry Jones, the cartoon-mustached pastor in Florida, threatened to burn a Qur'an on September 11, I read many complaints about how nobody ever paid that much attention or showed that much outrage when people burned Bibles. Well, here’s their chance to get their rage pants on.

    The Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, N.C. will celebrate Halloween by burning Bibles that aren't the King James Version, as well as music and books and anything else Pastor Marc Grizzard says is a satanic influence.

The church is burning other Bible translations that are not based on the “Textus Receptus,” and are, therefore, according to Grizzard, not the true word of God. Yes, the burning will include the Qur’an, along with books by “heretics” like Brian McLaren, Shane Claiborne, and Bishop John Shelby Spong. Those are the heretics you might expect Grizzard and his kind to burn.

Also on his list, however, the materials of other “heretics” like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Billy Graham, Rick Warren, Bob Jones, Charles Stanley, Joel Osteen, Joyce Myers, T.D. Jakes, and even the newly beleaguered Eddie Long. Even Mother Teresa makes his list of heretics. Apparently, feeding the poor and clothing the naked makes one a “heretic” in Grizzard’s book (don't tell Jesus!). Fred Phelps didn’t make the list, so that should be a hint of just who Grizzard’s fellow believers might look like.

On their website (NB: mute your computer unless your idea of a good time is Amazing Grace on an infinite loop), they encourage other churches to hold similar book burnings, or book “tearings” if local laws prohibit open fires. If all else fails, you can send your blasphemous material to Grizzard who will do the deed for you at their annual event.

The church apparently burned books and other materials last year on Halloween. Grizzard does not give a specific date for this year’s burning—and just to differentiate himself from Jones (whom he denounced as a “coward” for backing down from his plans to burn the Qur’an), Grizzard makes it clear that the public is not invited:

    We are inviting others to come but only by special invitation by me and me alone. I must know you personally, or your pastor, or if you wrote me last year in agreement with what we are doing. I may ask for your church’s name, phone number, and Web site to verify your stand.

What I see as the sin at the heart of Grizzard and Jones’ actions—as well as at the heart of anyone who seeks to violently control the free will or belief of others—is lust. These men lust for control; and in their lust they objectify others, people they call “heretics” or “sinners.”

Lust, in and of itself, is not a bad thing—not something sinful. As Matthew Fox writes, “Without lust, none of us would be here.” It was the lust of our parents that created us, the lust of the animals that provide us with their companionship, their meat, and their wonder.

It’s the lust of flowers and grains and insects that make this earth flourish. It is when “lust becomes a vehicle for objectifying,” Fox writes, “it is no longer an intimate expression or a generative one, it is a power that needs checking, a stallion that needs bridling, a force that needs tempering.”

Grizzard, Jones, and others like them are the products of lust gone wrong—and that turns them into sadists who need to control others. As psychologist Erich Fromm has observed, “The sadistic character is afraid of everything that is not certain and predictable, that offers surprises which would force him to spontaneous and original reactions.

For this reason, he is afraid of life. Life frightens him precisely because it is by its very nature unpredictable and uncertain. It is structured but it is not orderly.”

These men want order, and they will do whatever they can to quash the uncertainty of life. The King James is the only true Bible, Grizzard asserts, and in his assertion he makes his life certain—he’s right and others are wrong.

But, perhaps we can have more sympathy for Grizzard and those who believe as he does when we see them for what they are—people who are afraid of the messiness of life—people who cannot control their lust.

These are people who need to be shown that there can be a healthy lust for life that affirms not just their lives, but the lives of the very different, yet Holy, people all around them.

Instead of condemning people like Grizzard and Jones, perhaps we need to look deeper at our own reactions to their actions. If we react by wanting to stop them, or denounce them,  or to control them, then we are just as much a slave to our own lust for control as they are.

May we all, then, seek to find the Amazing Grace this church has named itself after.

-----------------------------------------

2010 Annual Book Burning

The annual Book Burning for 201 will be upon us very soon. This year is going to be much bigger and better. We already have collected more perversions of God’s Holy Word than we had last year, as well as many books by heretics and movies.

Many churches and individual Christians last year contacted us in support of what we were doing. Many comments about how they could help or participate in 2010. So we believe that God is using us to help encourage other believers to do what God’s Word says in Acts 19 about burning satanic books. We are not starting a movement, association, denomination, brotherhood, or anything else for that matter. We are not in charge of anything or over anything except our local church. We are just a “voice crying in the wilderness” trying to encourage others to “earnestly contend for the faith.”

We are burning Satan's bibles like the NIV, RSV, NLT, HCSB, CEV, NCV, NIRV, TNIV, NKJV, TLB, NASB, ESV, NEV, NRSV, ASV, NWT (Jehovah Witness Bible), Amplified Bible, God's Word Translation, 21st Century King James, Young's Literal Translation, Reina-Valera 1960, Darby, Good News for Modern Man, The Evidence Bible, Book of Mormons, The Message Bible, The Green Bible, Quran (Koran), Bible in Rhyme, Boomer Bible, and ect. As well as Greek New Testaments by Westcott & Hort, Metzger, Scrivener, Berry, Ginsburg, and Green. Also Herbrew-English Dictionaries by Brown, Driver, and Briggs. Also Greek-English Lexicons by Moulton, Thayer, 

Danker, and Liddell. 

These are perversions of God's Word the King James Bible.

We will also be burning Satan's music such as country , rap , rock , pop, heavy metal, western, soft and easy, southern gospel , contemporary Christian , jazz, soul, oldies but goldies, etc.

We will also be burning Satan's popular books written by heretics like Westcott & Hort , Bruce Metzger, Billy Graham , Rick Warren , Bill Hybels , James White, Kay Arthur, Charles Stanley, Pat Roberson, RC Sproul, Mary Baker Edddy, Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell, Britt Merrick, Max Lucado, Randy Alcorn, John Ortberg, Michael W. Smith, John David Clark Sr., Eckhart Tolle, Joni Eareckson Tada, Sarah Young, Stormie Omartian, Joseph Maxwell, John McArthur, James Dobson , Charles Swindoll , John Piper , Chuck Colson , Tony Evans, Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swagart , Mark Driskol, Franklin Graham , Bill Bright, Tim Lahaye, Paula White , T.D. Jakes, Benny Hinn , Joyce Myers , Brian McLaren , James White, Dave Ramsey, Alister McGrath, Ron Hill, Denver Moore, Mary Beth Chapman, Steven Curtis Cahpman, E Stanley Jones, Robert Schuller, Mother Teresa , The Pope , Rob Bell, Erwin McManus , Donald Miller, Shane Claiborne, Brennan Manning, William Young, Will Graham , and many more.

 

We are not burning Bibles written in other languages that are based on the original TR. We are not burning the Tyndale, Geneva or other translations that are based on the original TR or the KJB.

 

With that said we are asking for others to get involved this year in the 2010 Annual Book Burning. You or your church can do this in one or more ways. 

1. Plan at your church or home to have a book burning this year. 

2. If you are not willing to have a book burning then have a book tearing as we did last year due to state laws.

3. If you are not willing to do either a book burning or a book tearing, then begin to collect perversions, books by heretics, music, movies, magazines, idols (Buddha, Allah, Rosary Beads, crosses with Jesus on it, etc.), posters, etc. and send them to our church address (6865 Cruso Rd; Canton, NC 28716). 

4. Pray! This is the most important step you can do is to pray for God’s Word to be glorified and grow.

I would like to make a few comments about the request above.

First of all, we are not encouraging any church or individual to break their state laws and act stupid and be put in jail. If your state fire marshal says that it is against the law to have an open air burning or burning paper is against the law then abide by that law. Don’t do it. Just have a book tearing as we did last year. It actually gets the people more involved to have a book tearing. 

Secondly, I would video tape the service and the entire event to show that you didn’t break any laws and to encourage others to do the same.

Thirdly, don’t buy this stuff new. It just helps sales if you do. Last year we didn’t buy anything new. In fact, most of it was given to us free. If we did buy anything it was never over a dollar each, but most a quarter or fifty cents. We get these items at yard sales, consignment shops, second hand stores, flea markets, books stores, libraries, etc. Lots of places have a free area and that is what we keep an eye on all the time. One has to be committed to checking these areas each week. We always leave the KJB and good materials for people to choose from. Some people wrote last year making fun of us for buying all of this stuff new, and telling us how dumb we were. These “scholars” and Bible correctors are to smart to have common sense. 

Last of all, we would ask that whatever way you decide to get involved to please let us know. Simply by telling us who you are and which of the four ways you are going to participate. If you don’t want your name mention, the date of your event, then please let us know when you write. We would like to list all that are involved for the very fact the media, Bible perverts, the world and others think that we are the only people that believe that the KJB is the only Bible for the English speaking people. We would like to show the world that we are not the only church that stands for God’s Word. Even in our own county we didn’t have one person (outside our church members) or church to stand for God’s Word. The reason for this is because they just tote a KJB and use it, but they don’t believe it or willing to stand for it for the world to see. Paul tells us not to be ashamed of the Gospel. Neither should we be ashamed of the KJB that contains within its pages the Blessed Gospel. Are the preachers in this area ashamed that they carry a KJB? If one is not going to stand for the Bible what good does it do to carry one? The Bible tells us in these last days that there will be a turning from God’s Word which is Truth. The Bible calls these people Apostates that turn from the Truth, that deny His Word, and deny His name.

Next I would like to make a few comments concerning our 2010 Book Burning this year.

First of all, we are planning one sometime this year, but we are not sharing the date with no one this year. We are not doing this to get publicity as others have said but to obey God’s Word in Acts 19. We are inviting others to come but only by special invitation by me and me alone. I must know you personally, or your pastor, or if you wrote me last year in agreement with what we are doing. I may ask for your church’s name, phone number, and web site to verify your stand. We are doing no advertising in any way before the event. You may ask are you ashamed of what we are doing. NO! That should be obvious from last year when the whole world heard about it. The fact is, we rent a building, and we don’t own our own land, so we have to respect our other tenants in the building as well as the landlord. When we do have our own land and building one day, we will do things different, but that’s in the future.

Secondly, Yes! This year we will burn everything. Yes, you heard me right. We will BURN everything. We will tear up and destroy everything at our church as we did last year, but carry it at a later date to another state that allows open air burning. We are donating it to another church that is going to burn it with us. Both the tearing and the burning will be video taped to prove everything. Are we going to share the details before we do this? NO!

Last of all, we will abide by all state laws as we did last year.

We look forward to having a great time in the Lord this coming year. You can contact me through my email at agbckjv@aol.com.

Bumming with the Furies

Peter Leschak is an award winning prolific writer who writes books that capture your attention. One of his books is titled: Bumming With the Furies: Out on the Trial of Experience. Its a collection of stories of his life experiences. Some of it includes his journey into the cult of Armstrongism and into its so called college in Big Sandy. Following are some of his comments.

While many of my generation were training in combat in the paddies, jungles, and hills of Southeastern Asia, I was training for the Battle of Armageddon, for spiritual combat with Satan and his minions. Some of our teachers believed we would engage in actual fighting-an ethereal, supernatural war against evil spirits. I always pictured it in terms of science-fiction fantasies with flaming swords, thunderbolts, and Gods own lasers. Years later, upon seeing Star Wars, I was struck with a vivid sense of deja vu. Actually, it sounded like a hell of a good time a phantasmagoric, cosmic shootout with what we were anticipating was Jihad, a holy war in which we would slay the infidel and the rule the world as princes and priests of the Almighty God (Rev. 3:21, 5:10). Years later, I had no trouble understanding the Ayatollah Komeinis Revolutionary Guards. Fundamentalists, no matter what the particular religion, are more alike than different.

As in any army, our paramount lesson was respect for authority unquestioning obedience to superiors. God was our commander-in-chief, but he had divinely appointed the Armstrongs as His all-powerful lieutenants, and they in turn had designated other men as theirs. The church hierarchy was formal and rigid, with actual ranks within the ministry and a clear pecking order for the rest.

I entered WCG and AC flush with hope and idealism. We were preparing the way for the return of Jesus Christ to end all pain and suffering in the world. It was heady wine, sometimes the source of an actual physical rush. I was ready to obey and conform, and I did. This was good for me, and I was good for the world. Doubt crept in slowly, nearly always squelched by the overwhelming presence of too many people doing, saying, and thinking the same things. Toeing the line was supposed to make us happy, and when people know they are supposed to be happy that unhappiness is the result of sins against God then they act happy, even if they are not. Who was I to doubt the word of God (and the Armstrongs) as exemplified by the all-smiling faces of four hundred fellow students and seekers after righteousness? Could smiles be pernicious? Who was I to criticize the lieutenants and representatives of the Creator?

But early in 1972,a minister named Howard Clark was transferred to Texas from the headquarters campus in Pasadena, California. He was something of a legend in the WCG. While serving with the Maine Corps in Korea, he was severely wounded and subsequently paralyzed. He received one hundred percent disability from the Veterans Administration and was confined to a wheelchair. But then God called him into the Work, as we liked to say, and after being anointed with oil and prayed over by a WCG minister, he was healed he was able to walk. He attended AC and rose through the ranks, demonstrating a remarkable talent for preaching and public speaking.

He was loud and irreverent, articulate and keenly intelligent. One had to wonder why he was allowed to stay; he did little obeisance to sacred cows.

The presence of such a renegade was a revelation, but Clark offered us more than his own puzzling existence. That summer when life on campus slowed and many students and faculty were gone, he initiated what he called waffle shops. These were informal evening gatherings advertised by word of mouth, There might be poetry readings (of all things!), a film, Bible study, and of course listening to Clark as he waffled extemporaneously expounding on just about everything. To cadets in the army of God, regimented in body and spirit, this could be shocking.

During one waffle shop, Clark quipped: If Jesus Christ was a student at AC today, wed kick him out. We had strayed too far from the original precepts to be tolerated by the original teacher. It was that heretical thought, and a thinly veiled reference to some WCG ministers as con artists that spurred the gestapo into action. A senior who had attended the gathering, a leading upper-classman, went to the Dean of Students (Ron) Kelly the next day and reported what distressing things he had heard. The waffle shops were officially banned.

Unlike most of the faculty, Clark lived off campus, away from the bosom of the institution. Students began filtering out there, alone or in small groups, to sit in his office and listen. Rumors of a heretical underground, a free thought movement, began to circulate. People felt threatened. But Clark was not attempting to undermine AC. His main point was that we were all individuals before God and that we must truly cultivate independent minds. But that was not necessarily good for the cohesiveness of the army.

In the meantime, we were buying books-under the counter. Clark recommended The Faith of a Heretic by Walter Kaufman, and one of the students who worked at the college commissary ordered a few copies and kept them discreetly out of sight, far from the Louis Lamour westerns. If someone specially requested a copy, he would slip it into a bag and quietly had it over. The eyes of the true believers were everywhere; this was not an acceptable book for Gods students.

On page twenty-two, Kaufman had written: The aim of a liberal arts education is not to turn out ideal dinner guests who can talk with assurance about practically everything, but people who will not be taken in by men who speak about all things with an air of finality. The goal is not to train future authorities, but men who are not cowed by those who claim to be authorities".
These were not words that Chapman would have us memorize, especially since one of the conceits of AC was that it was providing us with a liberal arts education. My friend Gerry, who was on the staff of the college newspaper, once neglected to perform some small task that the faculty advisor expected him to have done.

I thought (so and so) was going to do it, Gerry told the man. That's your problem, replied the journalism instructor/ordained minister, you don't think! He then told Gerry that he wanted him to be robot, and, to demonstrate; he walked stiffly and jerkily around the room. It was a sincere performance, devoid of irony.

Leschak also tells a story about Ben Chapman (as so-called evangelist in WCG). Chapman married Richard Armstrong's wife sometime after Richard was died because of  Herbert's refusal to allow proper medical care. Chapman was not a well liked person in Pasadena. He rode around on the coattails of GTA. He was an arrogant ass, cruel, mean spirited and spiritually violent. Leschak has this to say about the idiot:

But my mind soon took a decisive turn, and it began in a classroom. Bill stood up to ask a question in Theological Research, the third-year Bible class. He was genuinely puzzled, and politely (I thought) disputed the conclusion we were supposed to have reached as the result of completing a homework assignment concerning the canonization
of the Bible. The instructor, a minister named (Benjamin) Chapman, immediately bristled. I could actually see him stiffen, tensing up as if for a physical battle. If he had been a dog, his hackles wouldve risen. An argument ensued, with Chapman not addressing Bills question, but rather accusing him of arrogance and insubordination. Bill stated repeatedly that he wasnt challenging Chapmans authority (though the question by its very nature of course had) nor showing disrespect, but the irate professor ridiculed him, demanding to know if he even believed in the Bible. A few students told me later that they had grown increasingly bewildered, amazed at what they considered to be a serious overreaction by Chapman. They said that if Bill had walked out, theyd have followed. (Thered been many complaints about the class among students.)

But finally Bill decided to just shut up and sit down. He was shocked, genuinely perplexed by what vehemence and contempt of Chapmans reaction to what Bill considered a legitimate question. This public attack by a superior, an ordained minister of God, was so distressing that Bill felt the whole thing mustve been his fault. That evening he went to Chapmans home and apologized. This humbling, magnanimous effort received a cold, Well, you should apologize response. There was no sense of warmth or conciliation, and absolutely no admission of at least partial wrong. Bill left angry and humiliated, violated once again. He believed that at Gods college there should be some recourse, so he made an official appointment with Chapman through his secretary, and asked if I could tag along. We discussed the mission at length and decided our purpose would be to respectfully inform Chapman that the majority of his students were dissatisfied with the way his course was run, and to propose some changes we felt would be beneficial. We believed the attitude of the class, especially after Bills excoriation, was ugly and that Chapman should be aware of it.

Unfortunately we were not granted an audience for three long weeks.

On a Friday evening in December, we finally entered Chapmans office, nervous and intimidated. . We spent two hours discussing these matters, and all was serene and friendly, at least on the surface. We shook hands as we left, and Bill and I were satisfied that all had gone well. We congratulated each other, convinced we had accomplished some good. Silly boys.

Next morning at Sabbath services, Chapman delivered the sermon. The standard length of a sermon in the WCG was one to two hours (though I sat through some as long as three, and heard about a few legendary five-hour marathons). Chapman all but personally attacked Bill and me for nearly an hour and half. I was stunned. Bill had opted for the afternoon services and thus missed another public thrashing, In a vicious assault upon those who question and doubt, Chapman referred to several points we had discussed only several hours before in the apparently benign atmosphere of his office. I expected to hear our names spewed out at any moment, held up as pariahs or perhaps insidious dupes of Satan. He set up straw men and violently knocked them down, quoting excessively from an outside theological work, which was obviously sloppy and in error as far as his audience was concerned. He used the book as an intelligent scapegoat, a means to ridicule contemporary scholarship in general (and hence thinking in general). He lambasted and belittled those who critically examined what he billed as the Truth. He laid it right out, asserting clearly, without equivocation: ITS NOT YOUR PLACE TO QUESTION WHAT YOUR TEACHERS TELL YOU! So there it was-the true face of AC and the WCG. The hierarchy was not after truth, but power. They had all truth; there was no need to seek more and there was especially no need to take any gruff from mere students-lowly sheep of the flock.

There's A New COG Splinter Group!

Hat's off to

Foresight of Hindsight blog 

for this great picture!

 

Oh The Humanity! Chiropractor Bob UPSET That COG7 Says It's OK To Work on Sabbath

LCG's and COGdom's apologist extraordinaire is having a royal hissy-fit that Church of God 7th Day is saying that it might be necessary to work on the 'Sabbath.'

He writes:

CG7-Denver has just published something in its Sep-Oct 2010 Bible Advocate magazine allowing people to work on the Sabbath:

Q Please reiterate our position on the Sabbath.  If, due to the economy, a member who is a deacon takes a job requiring him to work late on Friday, but he still attends Sabbath day services, does God’s mercy allow him to continue as deacon? How would you handle this?…

A We’re no longer under old covenant law but under the new covenant of God’s grace (Rom. 6:15; Heb. 8:13)…Every believer must strive, out of love, to dedicate the glorious Sabbath to the Lord. When forced to work, he does not violate the law of love. He continues to love his Lord and His day, regretting that he cannot keep it as he wished. That’s completely different from one who mocks the commandment by working on Sabbath, even though he could keep it, and smugly says we are under grace. One who cannot attend Sabbath services obviously cannot hold an important church office, since he’s not aware of what goes on there. The deacon who is required to work in the dark hours of Sabbath to provide for his household is not wrong. He may continue to serve because he attends worship during the day when church activities take place and he knows what’s happening.

This is an outrage. (emphasis mine) No one is being forced to violate the Sabbath, simply pressured.  We are all pressured to sin in many ways, but that does not make sin right.  It is still sin.

To try to reduce dissent from this outrageous response, CG7 had the following weasel words attached to the article (emphasis mine):

Editor’s note: Not official policy, here is a respected pastor’s answer to a not uncommon problem in CoG7.

This is still an outrage.

People either have the faith that God will provide or they do not.

This has to be his most offensive statement:

"Those who knowingly violate the Sabbath simply do not have the faith."

Chiropractor  Bob fails to forget that WCG (pre-1986) had score's of people who worked from Friday night sundown to Saturday sundown.  95% never got paid. They worked security, checked the computer systems and were generally on call 24 hours a day.  They were dubbed 'volunteers' in order to make it look OK to work.  Armstrongism has always had a way to get around everything that might contradict it's teachings.

All ministers in the church received pay for work on Saturdays.  As much as many want to deny it, those paychecks covered 'Sabbath'. work.  When you are salary, you are PAID for any work 24 hours a day seven days a week.

But on to 'meatier' things.  How quickly chiropractor Bob forgets the Scriptures Matthew 12:11, 12

What man shall there be among you, who shall have one sheep, and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it, and lift it out?  Of how much more value then is a man than sheep!  So then it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

In the book of Mark, he elaborates more on the same example:

And after looking around them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand."  Mark 3:5

Dale Ratzlaff (former SDA) writes in his book, "Sabbath in Crisis":

"This story deals specifically with Sabbath behavior.  The Jewish rabbis had interpreted healing, caring for the sick, as work, therefore a violation of Sabbath law.  However, they modified this so that one could care for those who were in life-threatening situations.  However, it was obvious that the man with a withered hand was NOT in a life-threatening condition.  This incident appears to be a direct confrontation by Jesus upon the commonly accepted interpretation of Sabbath law though not a violation of the Old Testament Sabbath law itself.


"Jesus showed His attitude by "looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart."  Then he demonstrated his authority to interpret the Sabbath law by openly calling the man to the front and healing him.

John 5:9-18 Tells the story about the Jews persecuting Jesus because he had broke the Sabbath law by telling the man he had just healed to take up his bed and walk away.  The Jewish authorities were OUTRAGED (Just like chiropractor Bob).

Ratlzlaff wites:

"This passage says that the Jews were persecuting Jesus because He was destroying, or invalidating, the Sabbath.  We should not be too hasty to denounce the Jews.  Old covenant Sabbath law clearly required that a person who openly broke the Sabbath was to be put to death (Ex 31:14, 15; 35:2). (One has to wonder if chiropractor Bob had his way that he would do this too!) The Pharisees had the old covenant record of the man who was caught gathering sticks on the Sabbath and was stoned to death at the express command of God for his violation (Numbers15:32-36)  They also had the later scriptural interpretations of Sabbath law to prohibit carrying a load on the Sabbath (Jer. 17:27

Next we should note Christ's defense of His Sabbath activities.  "But he answered them, My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working."

One has to really wonder if chiropractor Bob and his  idol Spanky Merrydeath would be eager to do such a thing too. One of Herb's main teachings was that when we became "god's" we would have the power to whip rebellious people into line.  There have been many Armstrongites though our history that have looked with almost orgasmic anticipation on ruling their world's with a 'rod of iron'.  That is also one of Spanky's favorite utterances too.

Living Church of God, just like the old WCG found ways of getting around Sabbath commands and various laws it did not want to keep.  It was OK to drive hundreds of miles on the Sabbath, it was OK to cook light meals, it was OK to spend hours setting up and taking down church halls, etc.  When Spanky wants to eat on the Sabbath he has absolutely no problem making cooks and waiters (as long as they are not gay) do his bidding.

If chiropractor Bob really knew his Bible he would plainly see that Paul states in detail that Sabbath observance undermines the gospel.

Herbert W Armstrong: Mr. Confusion

Mr Confusion

Herbert W Armstrong

by Roger Campbell

Back  to the Bible

Nebraska

1971

Pg 4

My first observation in readings his publications was that almost nothing he had to say was original, or new, but that it was certainly reorganized.  In fact, I began to see that I had found one of the most interesting and to borrow Mr. Armstrong’s own words, “shocking, incredible,” case of organized confusion, that I had ever run across.

So it is that today, some years after my study of Herbert Armstrong began, and with my file bulging with his publications, I have set down to write an article showing the “Plain Truth” about his teaching. As I begin, I can think of no more fitting title than one that appears at the heading of this analysis: “Herbert W. (pg5) Armstrong-Mr. Confusion” Let me tell you why.

I.   Herbert Armstrong’s confused about salvation.

Much can be endured in differences over Bible interpretation if a man is right in his understanding of the simple plan of salvation. Men may not agree on events of prophecy, systems of church government, to some of the so called non-essentials of the faith, but in this one important area a man must either be right to wrong.  There is no middle ground or room to debate.  There is but one way of salvation.

Armstrong’s contempt for the promise of salvation by receiving Christ as personal Savior is expressed by Roderick C Meredith, one of his writers, in the March, 1957 issue of the Plain Truth. He scorns the work of present-day evangelists in the following words:

“Many people contend that there are many evangelists stomping up and down the land telling their audiences about the reality of Jesus Christ and His shed blood and calling upon them to accept Christ and be saved.

(pg 6) “Come up and give your heart to the Lord tonight,’ they plead. ‘Won’t you come? Come now while the Spirit is moving you. Come up and say, Tonight I accept Jesus Christ as my personal Savior from sin.’

“The truth is that the inspired apostles and evangelists of the New Testament NEVER relied on this kind of empty preaching to save people from sin.  That sounds SHOCKING but it is true.”

If preaching of Christ’s blood is “empty preaching,” then certainly all the apostles are guilty of “empty preaching.”

The Apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesians that they were “made nigh by the blood of Christ” (Eph. 2:13).  In his Epistle to the Colossians. He wrote of the “redemption we have through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins” (Col 1:14)

The Book of Hebrews abounds with references to the importance of Christ’s shed blood.  And John wrote: “The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (I John 1:7).

Although Herbert Armstrong denies it, his way of salvation is a way of grace and law homogenized.  In his article “Just What Do You Mean (pg 7) –Salvation” (Plain Truth – July 1961),he sets out to prove to the world once and for all that the “persecutors” are wrong when they accuse him of teaching salvation by works.

His method in the article is to make you (the reader) the lost person he is leading to salvation. (We dare not say salvation-for Mr. Armstrong doesn’t really believe you have that until the resurrection.), He points our that you are a sinner and guilty before God, which of course, is correct.

From this he leads you to forsake your sin and to begin to keep the law but points out that although you have done this you are still lost.  He does this to prove that he does not teach salvation by keeping the law. He then leads you to what he calls “contact with God,” This state is achieved thorough Christ but must be maintained by keeping the law. He writes: “Your works-your Law keeping while certainly required…” and further, “So where are you?  Even with your Commandment-keeping which-make no mistake-God requires you.”

Anyone with a knowledge of Seventh-Day Adventism will (pg 8) immediately suspect Herbert Armstrong’s source for this part of his theology.  But let us not give Ellen G White undue credit for originality either, for she borrowed her pattern of teaching from certain teachers who “troubled” the church at Galatia (Gal 1:7).

How wisely Paul deals with his problem in Galatians 3:1-3: “O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?  This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?  Are ye foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now made perfect in the flesh?”

Salvation was not probation to the great Apostle.  He wrote, “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God” (I Cor. 1:18).  Paul was so sure of heaven that he assured the Philippians that to die would be ‘gain,’ and that to “depart and to be with Christ” was far better.

Mr. Armstrong’s confusion about salvation is evident then, as he considers it “empty preaching” to urge (pg 9) others to “receive Christ as Savior.”  This confusion is further evidenced by Mr. Armstrong’s belief that conversion is maintained by commandment-keepings’ mixture of law and grace.

II. Herbert Armstrong is confused about the Trinity.

Following the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Herbert Armstrong goes to great trouble to prove his belief in the Trinity is pagan.  He is a bit ‘unlike’ the Witnesses in his views concerning the Father and he Son, but seems identical with them in his teachings about the Holy Spirit.

To Armstrong the Holy Spirit is not a person but simply a ‘force.’  To support this unscriptural teaching, one of Armstrong’s writes, Dr. C Paul Meredith, blasts all who do not agree with him on this point by declaring: “Note now that the pagans termed the Holy Spirit a “Being” such as the Father and Son. They wrongly made a Trinity. Satan was confusing mankind. (Plain Truth, Feb 1969, pg 26)

If everyone who speaks of the Holy Spirit as a person is pagan, them, of course, Jesus must also be labeled as “pagan,” for he referred to the Holy Spirit as “He” time and again. As (pg 10) Christ revealed the great truth of the coming Comforter to the disciples, He said: “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.  And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment…Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth, for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you” (John 16:7-14). Notice the teaching of Jesus about this personal member of the Trinity who can hear, speak, show and guide. Certainly this can never be said of a ‘force’ as Armstrong defines the Holy Spirit.

Once the spiritual identification of the Holy Spirit is seen, the wonderful truth of the Trinity becomes evident. Let the reader turn to Matthew 28: 18-20, John 1:1-34, and other Scriptures and just believe the Bible, and he will have no problem in seeing that this plain spiritual teaching (pg 11) concerning the Holy Spirit is not pagan, but proper.

Therefore, we see Mr. Armstrong is no t only confused about himself and salvation but also the Trinity, because he believes the Holy Spirit to be a “force” rather than a “person.”

III Herbert Armstrong is confused about the nations.

Someone once said, “Show me a man who is right about Israel and I’ll show you man who is right about the rest of the Bible.”  That statement may not always be correct to the letter, but one thing is always sure: “Show me a man who is wrong about Israel, and I’ll show you a man who is wrong about God’s prophetic plan.”

Herbert Armstrong is wrong about Israel, and this becomes a source of error to him in a multitude of other things.

Perhaps most exciting of Armstrong’s writings is his booklet, The United States and the British Commonwealth in Prophecy.  In this he unveils his acceptance of the outworn and unscriptural British Israelism.  That is, he teaches that Britain and the United States are the lost ten tribes of Israel.

(pg 12) Prefacing this booklet, he writes, “No story of fiction was ever so strange, so absorbing, so packed with suspense as this griping story of the Bible.  After this interest-capturing beginning, he then presents in “Armstrong” style the usual fact-ignoring pattern of British-Israelism: “Ephraim is Great Britain, Manasseh is the United States.  The throne of England is the throne of David.”

There is not space here to deal with every aspect of this teaching, but it will suffice to show the false foundation upon which it is built.  Anglo-Israelism holds that at the return of Palestine after the captivity, only the House of Judah returned, leaving the rest of Israel to  wander on to Great Britain and the United States in the centuries to follow, making these two nations “Israel’s New Land” (US&BC in Prophecy, p. 15).

In the above-named booklet, Armstrong writes: “Only those of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi, who constituted the House of Judah, returned at that time.  Consequently, those in Jerusalem in the time of Christ were only these three tribes, not the House of Israel.”

(pg 13) Now what saith the Scriptures? “And there went up some of the children of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, and the singers, and the porters, and the Nethinims, unto Jerusalem, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes the King” (Ezra 7:7).  “So the priests, and the Levites, and some of the porters, and the singers, and some of the people, and the Nethinims, and all Israel, dwelt in their cities” (Neh. 7:73).

“And the seed of Israel separated themselves from all strangers, and stood and confessed their sins, and the iniquities of their fathers” (Neh. 9:2).

As to those in Palestine at the time of Christ, we quote the words of Peter on the Day of Pentecost: “therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36).

Because he takes specific judgments pronounced against Israel and wrongly applies them to the Untied States, Garner Ted Armstrong, son and associate of Herbert Armstrong, writes the following: By the time (pg 14) slow moving Russia is finally ready to strike, your Bible says America will have ceased to be a nation, her citizens removed into horrible captivity, and another, totally different power will have risen – Germany” (Plain Truth – July, 1959, pg 16).

Herbert Armstrong’s confusion about the nations, then, is the result of his belief that Britain and the Untied States are the lost ten tribes of Israel.

IV. Herbert Armstrong is confused about heaven.

By teaching in the unscriptural doctrine that there is a second chance after death, Herbert Armstrong strives to give hope to those who have had loved ones die without Christ.  But at the same time he tries to rob the believers of the hope that loved ones who die in Christ are immediately in heaven with the Lord.

Adding his voice to the Jehovah’s Witnesses on this false doctrines, he declares: “to continue with the question, ‘Who knoweth (whether) the spirit of man’ that is, the breath of man, ‘goeth upward, and the spirit of he beast, that is, the breath of the beast ‘goeth downward to the earth?’ Well, does any one know of it?  It’s a (pg 15) question.  Who knows it? The answer is. No body does” (Plain Truth, March 1957, pg 8).

To see the true teaching of this verse as the view of the natural man, the man “under the sun”, one needs but to read it in its context. (See Ecclesiastes 3:18-22).  Surely God has not given his entire revelation, the Bible, only to leave us in uncertainty on such a vital matter.  No, there is no doubt about it; the Bible teaches that we can be sure of heaven after death – if we are saved.  Multiplied portions of the Word of God guarantee it.  Do not let anyone steal from you this wonderful hope so surely promised to God’s children on the Bible.

Jesus said: “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you.  I go to prepare a place for you: (John 14:2).

Paul wrote with assurance: “For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle is dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made of hands, eternal in the heavens.  For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to clothed upon with our house which is from heaven…Therefore we are always confident, knowing that whilst we are at home (pg 16) in the body, we are absent form the Lord: (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord” (II Cor. 5:1, 2, 6-8).  The constant desire of the Apostle was to “depart and to be with Christ: which is far better” (Phil 1:23).

Peter looked forward to an “inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not way, reserved in heaven…” (I Pet. 1:4).

John was privileged to get a view of many of the scenes of heaven while he was on the Isle of Patmos, and he wrote of them in the Book of Revelation.  There saw those who had been saved while on earth and those who had gone through the great tribulation. He previewed the marriage supper of the Lamb where all the saved will one day sit with their savior. The Book abounds with the wonders of the blessed place where all the saints have their inheritance.

Therefore, when Herbert Armstrong says that no one can know what happened to the Christian at death, he reveals the he is confused about heaven, because the Scriptures are very clear on the subject.

(pg 17)

V. Herbert Armstrong is confused about himself.

Perhaps the most thorough job of deception that Satan has done with Herbert Armstrong is the deception, that he is sure that no one on earth is preaching the true gospel of the kingdom of God except him and his co-workers.  An article in the Plain Truth of February, 1958, has this to say:

“There is only one work that is preaching the true gospel of the Kingdom of God-the rule and the reign of God-to the nations. This is that work.  Then those who have their part in this work and are converted must constitute the Church of God!...

“every other work rejects the message of Jesus Christ or else rejects His rule through His laws. There is no exception.

“Yes, this work is the true church of God. All others are satanic counterfeits! It is time we come out from among them and become separate.”

Do you believe that every faithful pastor or missionary in the world today is a counterfeit?  Probably not, but Herbert Armstrong does.

(pg 18)

If you pastor and church are true to the Bible, and people are saved by their ministry, are you to label them as ‘counterfeit’ and leave your church, and send Herbert Armstrong your tithe?  Of course not!  But Mr. Armstrong teaches that you should.

Not only does Herbert Armstrong think that he and his associates are the only preachers of truth today, but his error seems to be that of the Mormons in his teaching that the true gospel message was lost to the world from approximately the days of the apostles until he began his radio broadcast in 1934. Let him speak for himself:

“On the first Sunday in 1934, God’s time had come.  God opened a Door! Jesus Christ himself had foretold this event!  Millions have read his prophecy.

“Yet on the first Sunday in 1934, probably no on-certainly not I myself-recognized what a momentous event actually was taking place.

“…It was the fulfilling of a definite cornerstone prophecy of Jesus.  More than that, it was the initial, start-off event of the fulfilling of some 90% of all the prophecies in the Bible! And approximately a third of (pg 19) the whole Bible in prophecy!” (Plain Truth, Jan. 1959, pg 3).

Now follow this closely. Mr. Armstrong teaches that although he did not even know himself, 90 percent of all the prophecies in the Bible hinged upon the beginning of his radio and literature ministry which began in 1934.

The article goes on to say that in about A.D. 69 the roman’s successfully stamped out any effective organized preaching of the gospel, and that the professing Christians turned away from Christ’s truth and embraced pagan fables.  Soon the true gospel message was lost, according to Mr. Armstrong. Now notice this further quotation from the same article:

“From that time, the world has heard the name of Christ! The world has heard the Gospel of MEN ABOUT Christ.  The world has called it ‘The Gospel of Christ’-but it is very far form Christ’s gospel-it is a paganized gospel of men about Christ. It is a counterfeit!”

Thus, we see Mr. Armstrong is confused about himself as he thinks he and his co-workers are the only ones (pg 20) preaching the true gospel.  He is also confused about himself as the thinks that he thinks the gospel message was lost from the time of the apostles until he began his broadcast in 1934.

VI. Conclusions.

In conclusion we remind the reader of a few basic facts which will assist him in guarding himself and others against this system of error.

First, let us be reminded that almost none of Mr. Armstrong’s teachings are original. While the style of his writing and speaking seems to try to convey the idea that most of his doctrine is new, startling and sensational, it is in reality a rehashing of teaching that has been rejected through the years by those who are true to the Bible.

Secondly, Mr. Armstrong’s teachings are largely a mixture of the doctrines of Seventh-Day Adventism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and British-Israelism. While occasionally moving in some other direction, nearly all of Armstrongism falls into these three areas.

Thirdly, Mr. Armstrong regards all other Bible teachers, pastors, churches, Bible schools as satanic counterfeits.  This even includes those (pg 21) groups whose teachings he has borrowed.

It is quite amusing to read from his article “Persecution” (Plain Truth Oct. 1960 pg 13), Mr. Armstrong’s defense against one who has written an article accusing him of satanic deceptions. He writes, “There is an axiom, One who accuses another is always guilty himself of the very thing of which he accuses another.”  This, of course, carried through in Armstrong’s case would make him a satanic counterfeit for calling others the same.  Confusing, isn’t it?  But then that is the way of confusion.  It multiplies.