Dennis On "Churches Need the Skeptic Like the Oceans Need the Sand"

 

Churches Need the Skeptic 

Like the Oceans Need the Sand

 

I have always had a very skeptical side to my perspectives and in what others tell me is so.  I have been this way since I was a kid and do not credit with WCG with "making me this way."   I'm Dutch.  I have to be skeptical!   

But  all during my tenure as a WCG pastor, I had topics that easily aroused my skepticism.  One, and one I never gave a sermon on, was the speculation about the Place of Safety.  All crazy proof-texting aside, I knew in my soul that I would never deliver the message to "flee" to any congregation I was pastoring.  I simply did not believe it and the risks far outweighed the benefits.  "Hide me in the grave," was ok with me on this one.  I simply did not trust any human to get this one right.  Gerald Waterhouse kept my skepticism at an all time high and on red alert with his serious yet nutty speculations that he made sound like the way it all is.  I can honestly say, I took Gerald Waterhouse with more than a grain of salt when he came to town.  It ended for me finally telling him that his visits caused me more problems than they were worth, and that from now on, any fears or questions the membership had about what he said would be directed to him personally to answer.  I was not standing in for him.  

Dates when this or that Biblical event would come to pass always left me terribly skeptical simply because , to date, everyone had been 100% wrong 100% of the time.  The odds were on my side. 

I was skeptical about whether it made any difference if a woman wore makeup or parents had their kids immunized.  I had mine immunized in 1974 which was my second year into the ministry. I was skeptical of the Divorce and Remarriage question and never kept a current couple apart if that was their decision regardless of their past marriages.  I just didn't feel i was smart enough to decide such things and had no clue what the Bible formula for such things was anyway.  On many topics my skepticism just manifested in telling the member to do as they saw fit and as they understood it.  I have never regretted that. 

Perhaps it is more common sense that I am speaking of.  It seemed in so many to be in such short supply. but a healthy skepticism can protect one from a lifetime of believing the unbelievable and following the wrong guy with the wrong ideas down the wrong road.

If I were you in RCG/PKG/PCG/ and whatever other combo of alphabet soup you can come up with, I'd listen up.   Your first clue would be that ONE man at the top who knows it all, decides it all and declares it all.  A bit of skepticism expressed can save you a lifetime of regrets. 

With this in mind, let's expand a bit on the topic of being skeptical.  Is it possible that when a minister stands every week giving a sermon on a given topic or quoting the various "And God said..."  or "And Isaiah said..."  he might simply be passing on hearsay?   We sooooooooooooo easily assume that what everyone said, did, did not do or told everyone else how it all is, is true and was truly said.  

Can we sometimes see the Bible, especially the parts where people can be motivated to do terrible things or believe harmful stuff, may just be hearsay, inaccurate and not intended for today?  Do you have enough of a skeptic in you to protect you from the wild ideas of ministers gone nuts?  Let's ask ourselves a few questions on this topic of skepticism and the Bible itself.  

First, a definition of hearsay.

Evidence that is offered by a witness of which they do not have direct knowledge but, rather, their testimony is based on what others have said to them.

 

And herein lies the rub.  Everything written in the Bible about everything from Genesis to Revelation is mere hearsay.  I was not there.  No God said anything unto me.  I never knew Adam or Eve, Cain or Abel.  I only know what someone said they said, or did or why they should not have done it.  

I never knew a Noah or his family or got to actually see how righteous he was or how bad the rest of mankind had become.  I only have some one else's word for it and they got it from someone who got it from someone who got it from who knows who.  

There is not one story, event, conversation, declaration , idea, truth, practice, misbehavior, sin, righteous behavior or quote that I ever actually was there to see or hear for myself.  I have no idea what was really said, by whom and for what reason.  They say the winners write the story anyway?  Winners of what?

I am told someone named Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. But there is evidence that this is not so. It is more likely they were written by the captive priesthood during the 5-600 BCEs while in Babylon to give their obscure people a dazzling pedigree. But I can't know. I wasn't there. I didn't see who wrote what and how it got put in the mouth of some one named Moses.  

I am told hundred of thousands to a couple million Israelites left Egypt "that same day."  Really?  How do you do that.  I can see how long it takes to get a marathon of hundred or a few thousand going.  How do millions do that in a day?  How do you tell them to stop before those in front are pushed into the sea or a sand dune and suffocated?  Why is there absolutely no evidence of this event in archaeology or secular history?  It's all hearsay as far as I can tell. 

Whoever wrote it and told the story had some great details about who was related to who, but then could not once name a Pharaoh in the whole story.  Why would you not mention the name of the presiding Pharoah. It would help place the story. Or maybe no one really knew of one specifically and besides the story was more important that who the stars were.  Yet, it's all hearsay.  I simply have to trust the storyteller knew the facts. But how can I do that?  Where did he get them? 

I am told that Adam named ALL the animals on earth.  Really?  How did he do that and why can't you write down what he called them then.  Or are we just led to believe that this is why a hippopotomas is not called a hippopossum?  Who named the Polar Bear and the Walloby?  Where did the platypus and the kangaroo get their names?  Who wrote them down and passed them along.  Could Adam write?  The story is merely hearsay.  None of us were there and we couldn't prove it if you put a gun to our heads.

Hundred of times we are told, "And the Lord God said...", or "And God said..." Really?  I didn't hear it and yet so much seems to ride on my absolutely believing that someone told someone who told someone who told someone what some voice said to someone at sometime over something important that God wanted us all to know.  How can I believe that is how a God communicates such important things?  

A woman once told me that while I was not aware of it, I was , in fact an angel.  She meant that I was a real Angel in disquise on this earth and that even I did not know it.  Trust me, I did not believe her.  So if I would dismiss something like this I heard yesterday from the source who said, "God told me...", why on earth could I reach back and trust something supposedly said 2000 or 3000 years ago and not even to me!  I can't. 

Churches base entire prophetic musings on what they READ the Lord God said to an Isaiah, Jeremiah or and Ezekiel who then turns around and tells us that God said for them to tell the people this or that.  How can we know that.  What if Isaiah was schizophrenic and no one understood that then?  What if Jeremiah was on egg short of a dozen and nuts needing counseling or medication and not followers?  What if Ezekiel was paranoid or Amos a bit daft for spending so much time in the hills tending sheep?  How can I trust that.  The very people who were told such things rarely believed them.  Why 2500 years later would I take their written words, (are they really their words?) seriously?  I was not there and evidently even if I was , I may have laughed them to scorn as we are want to do of our own Prophets, Priests and Apostles in the COG quackery.  

On top of that, all I actually have is a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy , copies without end of what someone was originally told before anyone even wrote stuff down.  Really?  

The biggest mistake the compilers of the New Testament made was to include four Gospels.  At least now we can see how hear say works.  None of the four agree and are far from harmonious no matter how sweetly one inserts, "we believe the entire New Testament to be the inerrant Word of God."  Really?  Have you read it. What we end up with are four different accounts of hearsay.  Someone later called Mark for convenience told us his view of "And then Jesus said..."    Someone, later called Matthew for convenience gave us his rendition of "And Jesus..." amending a few of Mark's more embarrassing memories of Jesus or why John baptised Jesus, since it was for the remission of sins, which of course, Jesus had none of. 

You should know by now the Birth Narratives of Jesus must be hearsay.  Mark knew of none. Matthew had his version very different from Luke, while John said Jesus was born from the foundation of the world.  Nice touch?  Was he there?  No. He just heard it from someone who heard it...you get the point.  We have no idea what Jesus said himself as Jesus either could not write himself or chose not to.  Big mistake.  Letting others get it right decades if not a couple hundred years later is not very dependable.  I can't remember or quote my dad from 1963 much less my Great Great Great Grandfather from who knows when. 

And don't even try to figure out what happened at the crucifixion and resurrection.  Those four books can't even get it straight.  Who wrote down what Jesus said when they were all asleep and he prayed privately to God?  Who wrote down or was told to pass on what Pilate's wife dreamed and said to her hubby about letting Jesus go?  Beats me. But that would have to be hearsay for sure. No one was there.

Was there an earthquake?  Was there not?  A man in white?  An Angel, Two men in white. Two Angels?  Depends who you ask.  Who went to the tomb? Peter and John.  Just the women?  Which women?  Did they believe or not?  Did they tell anyone or not?  Depends on who you ask.  Hearsay.  

And finally...the COG of God Manuel for Church Growth....Revelation.  One man, named John, whom is assumed to be the John of the Gospels but may not be at all, has a vision.  Really?  And I am supposed to throw my heart and soul, money and time, belief and loyalty into this vision of dragons and demons, vials, trumpets, trombones and the occasional saxophone?  Is this not hearsay?  Would you believe anyone today who had such a vision.  We don't believe Dave Packs view of himself or Ron Weinland's view of himself.  We don't really think Gerald Flurry is "that Prophet," do we?  Some very few do, but they do so on hearsay as well as God did not actually speak to the brethren about these great truths.  Ron Weinland just makes it up as he goes as do most but loudly proclaims "God  wants...", God says..." , "God inspires me to say...."  "God needs us to...."   Really?  All hearsay that you choose to believe without proof.  And to your harm I might add.

So here in lies my problem.  God did not speak any of what is contained in the Bible to me.  Oh yes, I know..."That is what faith is all about."  But I am not so willing to give my mind over to that easy out for the Prophet, Priest, king, Apostle or Witness.  Much too much at stake to allow myself to give in so easily to someone else's vision of what God or Jesus is doing, how and when.  I'm sorry. I just can't do it.  It is all hearsay or made up to sound like something official from on high. 

When HWA used to say,  "God says," or "God is doing...",  I sorta believed it and I sorta had the attitude of "well, we'll see i guess."   Nothing HWA said God was doing or saying or inspiring or anything was really true in the long run.  It all was hearsay on HWA's part and then on ours if we bought into it.  None of us, not even the leadership had any direct experience with any of it.  It was mere Bible readers seeing themselves in the scriptures as some still do today and all they have to say is mere hearsay about who and what God is , and what is expected of the congregation.

Ron Weinland declares there not enough time now to bother with marriage or divorce issues  in the church so there will be none, no dating and no marriages.  What a fool.  Even I know the hearsay in the Book says, "In the latter days....some shall depart from the faith,  forbidding to eat meats and to marry," or something like that since that too was hearsay passed on.  And while Ron, or Dave or Gerald or whoever may say it with conviction, eh..so what.  It's all opinion and hearsay and no one has ever yet been right about how it all is. 

So, the next time your guru tells you who said or who did or what God said or Jesus did or did not do, ask yourself, "Really, and you KNOW this?  Or did you just read that somewhere?"  Because there is a 100% chance that they got it from someone who got from someone who got it from someone who wrote it down and made a copy of a copy of a copy for the next 3000 years.  All hearsay and something that would never stand up as evidence in any real ability to prove anything really happened or was said as advertised. 

Faith is what we require of ourselves to keep the story alive. Faith is what we have to bridge the gap between what someone says happened, or is said to have happened, and what really happened or did never happen which we can never know.  We simply weren't there. Faith is all too often what we cruise on until the facts present themselves.  Most of the facts may not present themselves in our lifetime which is annoying to me. 

God created skeptics to keep the clergy honest  and the laity on their toes, though it doesn't work all that well from what I can tell.  

"God said it. I believe it. That does it for me,"  just doesn't work for me and many others who filter such things the same way.  I wasn't there.  It is mere hearsay. 

Maybe it's just me. Amen for now...

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Human Misery at Christmas

One of my favorite blogs to read is "Stuff Fundies Like"  It is geared towards the craziness of fundamentalism.  They had a great entry the other day in relation to Christmas which sounds exactly like what most of the Armstrongites believe.  If you follow any of the COG Facebook pages you will see similar comments to this.

 Human Misery

‘Tis the season to be jolly! And I hate it. Just look at all those sinners thoughtlessly making merry with their booze and music and not even realizing that God’s wrath hangs over their head. How dare they celebrate as if they had some right to enjoy this holiday when they haven’t ever darkened the door of a bible-believing church. Those of us who have worked tirelessly to spread the gospel are the only ones who truly deserve such festivities
.
Now certainly some will have an appropriate amount of melancholy as befits their lost condition but even those will be too blind to know that the answer to their “depression” lies in a trip to an old fashioned altar not the liquor store or pharmacy. But most of the heathens, and perverts, and Calvinists will be out dressed in their finery, eating, drinking and being merry. It makes me sick to think about.

I can only hope that some of them get taught a lesson before the season ends. Perhaps a few well-placed car crashes or house fires will set the proper tone as besuits these heathen’s lost condition. One can only hope that God in his infinite mercy will send such calamities to soften their hearts. What a wonderful Christmas present that would be.

But they do look merry, don’t they? They must be so deceived. Smiles and laughter fill the air. Satan is certainly at work here. They can’t really be happy. Only obedience brings happiness. Only the obedient like me should be so happy.

I wish I were.

Dennis On "A Monkey Named Ubastard"

A Monkey Named Ubastard

I have a monkey. His name is Ubastard. I named him that because that's what he calls me when I let him. He lives in my head and is the monkey on my own back. I suspect I have befriended him by now and give him a comfy place to live in there, but I wish he would go away.

Ubastard has an amazing ability to bridge the gap between my mind and my emotions. Once he starts his dialogue with me, I can literally feel him connect the two. Since emotions are the body's reaction to the spinning of the mind, the little booger seems to have the amazing ability to start the processes of anxiety or a bit of depression at will. Ubastard!

I believe UB has live there since I was a kid but spent most of my own childhood just growing up himself. I don't remember all that many discussions with him when I was kid. I didn't even know his name was Ubastard until I went to Bible College. It wasn't really a seminary. The way the Bible was studied was to simply read it and weave it together in one complete incoherent whole. There was no study of the who, what, where, when, why and how's of scripture. I have had to do ALL that during my time as a Pastor and since.

 Let's face it, when you go to a denominational school, you get the denominational spin. I would have done better at Harvard Divinity School where one no doubt can freely admit to other perspectives on the topic. As a life long liberal Dutchman, I am sure I could have been persuaded to let go of guilt, shame and fear aspects of religion and enjoy the philosophical study of theology. But oh no, I had to affiliate with the literalists who feed Ubastard and inserted him in my mind when I was either deep in prayer or sleeping.

Anyway, at Bible College, one gets molded, shaped and eventually cloned into the very image of God, even though you don't. I remember sitting in first year Bible class which was a survey of the harmonious Gospels which later I came to see aren't. We heard a lot about the life and times of Jesus and his merry men, but a lot about sex as well. Ubastoring young people on the topic of sex in Bible College is a must. While I was wondering how the 12 could go so long without intimacy or sex, I was being assured that they had become Eunuch's for the Kingdom of God's sake. Ewwww.

I did read where Peter had a mother-in-law, and thus a wife, but then she faded quickly out of the picture. For either one year, or three or ten, depending, these guys must have been serial killers at heart walking around in the desert and saying "behold" all the time. Guys who don't experience intimacy and sex do this I believe...and are very angry inside. I get curious when a pastor dwells on the evils of sex. But I spare you.

The should not's and must nots were endless. We were entertained with the professor prancing around the stage acting "queer" as that was the in word then and we all were supposed to laugh and be men about it all. We tried to talk in deep masculine voices and not wear pink so as not to be confused with the enemy. Once, he counted slowly to four to illustrate to the women in the class just how quickly a man could aroused over their not dressing discretely. My buddies and I estimated he was more than two seconds off on the slow side and that what a girl wore had little to do with it. Add to all this weekly in class meme programming, weekends of Bible Study and Sermons, and Ubastard has acquired an endless supply of criticism to throw at me when I left him out of the picture and fell short of the expectations of others or the Book they thought knew how we all should and must be.

Of course, we had to become perfect in all things. We had to think like Jesus thought and Act like God in all things. I once called someone a fool just as Jesus did from time to time, but got reamed out for being in danger of hell fire as Jesus taught would be the fate of those that called people fools. I'm confused!

I could have come up with the "What would Jesus do" thing years ago, but I was too busy feeling inadequate, fearful, guilty and shameful as was expected to think I could do what Jesus would do. Years later I came to wonder just what exactly Jesus was doing with Mary Magdalene who it seems ended up on the right hand of him in DaVinci's Last Supper. I can see where the part in the Gospel of Thomas with Peter chiding Jesus for kissing her too often on the lips, didn't make the NT cut of acceptable books. I believe he also asked Jesus why Jesus loved Mary more than the guys, but Jesus is said to have replied, "Why does she love me more than you do?" Whoa...nice comeback!

I remember the couple that found themselves the first semester and got kicked out by the second. They married and I spent the next three years wondering how their sex lives were going. All the rest of us were in limbo over this and Ubastard was in full swing by now. "ONE, TWO...doh" I tried all I could to get to FOUR, but I was evidently a particularly perverted Dutchman. I found out later that the only ones allowed to break the rules of God, as laid down by the professor, were the kids of the Evangelists, faculty kids and those that grew up in the denomination and were only allowed to go to this particular school being programmed from their youth to do so. Actually they didn't have a Ubastard from all I can tell. There is no freedom like the freedom church kids have when they grew up soaking in something they had no intention of doing.

Ubastard thrives on the sincere.

At any rate, Ubastard still lives and chatters too much in my mind. Some believe this is good as his purpose it to direct me to the straight, narrow, righteous and true. Some say God put Ubastard there as my monkey on my own back guide. But personally Ubastard, the Monkey on My Own Back is a creation of my mind to keep me less than authentic, under the control of the powers that be and kept in line with guilt, shame and fear, which a the trinity of worthless emotions if ever there was one.

Guilt, shame and fear are all imposed upon one in some way as a way to keep one weak, compliant and pliable, to the will of others...to the tribe or church if you will. They all assume there is just one way to be as a human being and any stepping outside of the the organizational box produces these emotions to get you back in. Maybe back in is not where one really needs to go.

There are several ways to defeat Ubastard. One is to breathe through when his fear, shame and quilt shatter provokes anxiety which is projected fear into the future or the fear of future consequences for not getting back into Ubastards camp. Just breathe...slowly, from the tummy and breathe. I don't know why he does not like that, but he doesn't seem to thrive in deep slow breathing. Ubastard is more of an upper chest breather and does it quickly. Maybe opposites defang him. Maybe his way of making my body breathe sends my brain the chemicals he loves to bathe in, which of course is fear, quilt and shame. Slow breathing might send the message to my mind that all is well and that it can keep the fear, quilt and shame juice but feel free to send the love, joy and acceptance juice on down! I think that's how it works. That's one of the few times Ubastard calls me Ubastard, and leaves me alone for a time.

Of course meds can be helpful. Whoever created Ativan must work directly on the right hand of God. On occasions breathing won't cut it and Ubastard has the upper hand. So as not to have a completely worthless and anxiety ridden morning, I take it. I don't like to, but I do and it's my decision. I know when Ubastard is on the offensive, I need some keymasters to help out. It runs right to the favorite cell receptors for Ubastard's mix but blocks them so his keys are worthless and he can't get into my breathing, tummy or thought spinning cells. Ha! Locked out! Take that Ubastard! I'd like to think, in time and with skills of thought that this amazing biosuit I wear to transport my spirit and experience my world in a limited five sensed way, could take over and simply remove Ubastards keys once and for all.

There are hundreds of sites with wonderful information on defeating Ubastard the Monkey on your own back. I think I tolerate him because I am supposed to keep him around for my good, but he doesn't feel good and in both the short and long haul, doesn't serve me much good. I have watched thousands apply the rules of Bible School to themselves all my life. Some do nicely but admit to a certain duplicity behind the scenes. Some claim no duplicity, but seem sad and unfulfilled. Some seem happy and and bouncy and I consider these the most dangerous of all. I always want to know what's really going on with them. Me thinks you gush too much in Jesus. I am often proved right down the road. Many are stuck in relationships that feel more like brother-sister stuff. Nothing much to look forward to. Nothing much left to say. And no creative intimacy or talk about how one really feels down deep inside. Certainly they are not going to explore anything the church would disapprove of, even if the minister was doing that himself.

Ubastard seems to govern just how much one allows themselves to speak about as well. Let's face it, it is no fun sharing when, in fact, one is supplying the one spoken to the bullets with which to shoot back at you. As a result, there are many quietly desperate human beings who neither speak their heart nor share their thoughts out of anxious fear , guilt for doing so or shame over what they feel they need in life, before it goes away. Human stuff really and Ubastard, the Monkey on One's Own Back, seems bent on keeping the human in line with a thousand soul sucking organizations, churches and denominations , that feed him endless shoulds, musts, should nots and must nots, but never free to find no need for them and seek an authentic self.

This is why "Born Right the First Time" is quite a dose of poison for Ubastard and I am pretty sure he simply can't handle the thought. It would take away his power of control and his litany of reasons one has qualified today as Ubastard. All I know is that it does not help and does not serve me personally in any meaningful way to strive for a perfection the book says we must and yet not know one single person on the planet to point to as having done well in that. Perfect people are scary people and duplistic beyond measure behind the scenes. Perfect people, with the perfect understanding of the perfect on set of perfect truths are perfectly scary and often make a big splat when they fall and join the human race. Ted Haggard, former head of the National Association of Evangelicals comes to mind as an example of struggling with Ubastard all one's life and never just being authentic. Of course being authentic often means you lose your job and high position in the minds of others who know Ubastard only too well themselves. 

Sometimes a church congregation is content to let a pastor be the sacrificial life of goodness and light, while they can tell Ubastard to go to hell anytime they wish. As long as the pastor type proves it can be done as expected, all is well. Let the pastor prove himself way too often in open conflict with Ubastard, and out you go. Scares the people that they might get caught next.

One hint to me is that all Ubastard seems to say to me is that you really aren't good enough as is. You need to be more like someone else, who I am not sure is who I really ought to be like or even need to go to the trouble of being like. I haven't found another human on the planet , save maybe the Dali Lama, who appeals to me as the kind of person I'd rather be. And I am also not so naive to think that wanting anyone else's dirty laundry is a good swap.

So here we are. A little piece of consciousness contained in our limited five sensed carbon based wetsuit for a short time of experiencing this world as best we can. It's all a wonder and I believe benevolent more than malevolent, though some people let Ubastard take over and loose themselves completely in becoming the sharped fanged nasty Monkey personified. No longer is UBastard the monkey on the back of a person...he is the person. The monkey ate the man.

I'm not advocating exterminating Ubastard completely. But I think there need to be some rules of engagement.

1. Ubastard shall not endlessly repeat one topic over and over. He will understand that I am usually way ahead of him and don't need to keep hearing it over and over.

2. Ubastard will not use fear of eternal punishment when a human life is less than a hair width's experience in the arena of billions of years of galactic, star and planetary evolution.

3. Ubastard will acknowledge that "born right the first time" has merit and never being good enough is a tool of control and results the unhelpful experiences of anxiety and depression in which nothing good gets done.

4. Ubastard is not allowed to only quote ancient texts of Taliban perspectives in his onslaught but is now assigned to read and understand Conversations with God by Neil Donald Walsch, The Power of Now by Eckart Tolle, The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz and The Tao of Pooh by Benjamin Hoff. No bananas if he refuses to read and apply these books.

5. Ubastard is not allowed to disturb sleep time.

6. Ubastard is not allowed to quote only from the King James, New International, and the Bible for Modern Dudes in promoting guilt fear and shame.

7. If Mebastard finds Ubastard not to have done and understood the above mentioned assignments, let him be banished to the forest of guilt, shame and fear where he seems to thrive better anyhow and there are millions backs he can easily jump on....just not mine anymore

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Are You One of The "Unclean" Ones?

Apostle Malm has been on a rampage lately ripping UCG up one side and down the other for their "apostate" leanings they are supposedly moving towards.  Apostle Malm thinks that UCG is starting to focus too much on love and not enough on the extra law keeping they should be doing.  The burden and heavy yoke of the law is more worthy than showing love to fellow humans.

This however was not necessarily all UCG's fault that they are falling into sin.  It all started with HWA when he started getting a big head after Loma died and when he allowed the leaven of GTA to infect the organization.

We are commanded to “Cry Aloud and Spare Not” and when HWA did that up until the 60′s, he received a quality response from quality people who really had been “Called Out” and understood,  When HWA began to water down the outreach by Ted and himself; a lower quality of response was received by many people who did NOT ruly understand and were not truly “Called” of God, cme along with those truly called out.

Consider what happens when you mix a hot with cold?  What do you get?  Lukewarm!

Yes there was growth in numbers and even in funds, but the quality of the whole system doctrinally began to unravel as the “unclean” were mixed with the spiritually “clean” in a big way and the leaders watered down doctrine further and further to bring in more people as they became addicted to numbers and wealth.

According to the Apostle in the early years of the church when Herb "cried aloud and spared not" the spiritually pure came in in droves along with their money.  They were the "called out ones" who were the driving force behind spreading the gospel.  Then Loma had to go and die which then lead to Herb getting big headed and arrogant.  He started taking on all kinds of titles and revelled in the accolades of world leaders and dignitaries.

It was during that time that the "unclean" started coming into the church which eventually lead to the apostasy and the huge exodus of fake, worthless, and unclean believers.  Because you are spiritually unclean you no longer believe in the teachings of HWA and are therefore reprobates.

All I can say, Thank God I am a REPROBATE!

Are You Prepared For HWA Yelling At You Again?

For those of you who never quite got enough of Herb yelling at you from the pulpit 

or shouting at you in the member letters, 

rest assured that HWA is coming back to rip you up one side and down the other! 

Instead of dealing with Jesus at the resurrection 

you will have a showdown with Herb 

and boy is he pissed!

But Mr. Armstrong was clear, too. He preached the whole gospel. Indeed, I wouldn’t understand any of the gospel at all save for what God taught me, and many of us, through the words of Mr. Herbert W Armstrong.
Did Mr. Armstrong recognize that the gospel taught by mainstream Christianity was disastrously off? Of course! If anyone reads anything Mr. Armstrong wrote and doesn’t pick that up, they haven’t read much at all! He recognized that the “gospel” being touted by most was simply a story about Christ—not the actual Divine Message that He preached at all! Most cut the very heart of the gospel right out: the coming Kingdom of God! And the part they tried to teach about salvation, he recognized was a counterfeit that didn’t explain salvation, at all!

Plenty of quotes could be provided from Mr. Armstrong demonstrating that he understood this—and many provide such quotes. That Mr. Armstrong recognized that the shallow “gospel” about Christ had replaced the actual gospel OF Christ is a given, as easily demonstrated by ample amounts of “quotable quotes.” Who disputes that? I don’t. No one I know in the Church does.

But what about the quotes that those who attack the gospel don’t give? What about the quotes that illustrate Mr. Armstrong understood the gospel more fully than those who attack his message (while claiming to believe in it) give him credit for? Why don’t they provide those quotes, as well? And in the rare case when they do provide one of them, why do they insert their own commentary into the middle of Mr. Armstrong’s words, making him out to be the world’s worst writer instead of the powerfully effective “plain truth” preacher that he really was?

Again, for the sake of emphasis: The Bible record is clear about the gospel brought by Jesus Christ, and I am humbled to be allowed to be a part of a Work that continues—just as Herbert Armstrong did—to preach that gospel. If anyone would like to prove to me that what we preach is not that gospel, they are free to open their Bibles and try. I’d rather be shown to be wrong and be right with God, than to be declared right but be wrong with God. Really: Show me. Put your Bible where your mouth is.

 However, this post isn’t about that. It’s about the fact that many continue to, in effect, slander Herbert W Armstrong by saying that he preached an incomplete gospel—all while claiming to “stand for Herbert W Armstrong.” Some seem to do so with good intention, being honestly deceived by those skilled at quoting a lot without (wink, wink) quoting too much (nudge, nudge). Those who are self-deceived by their Jeremiah 17:9 hearts are another matter. It’s one matter to believe a lie out of confusion, but another entirely to continue in a lie because it serves one’s ego. As for which category one falls into, thankfully it is not my task to judge, but His. I’d rather assume the best until I have good reason to believe otherwise.

From Herbert W. Armstrong and the “Whole, Pure Gospel”