Monday, June 4, 2012

More Amazing Than The Dead Sea Scrolls





Why is it that everything a COG or former COG member touches has to be so earth shattering significant?  We have the best prophets and apostles.  We have the best biblical knowledge, we write better booklets, we do better television shows, we build better auditoriums and colleges.  the list could go on and on about how we think we are God's gift to the world.  Yet, if we truly were, why are there over 700 some splinter cults with 700 different opinions?

This issue of The Journal has an ad for a new Bible translation.  We already have Fred Coulter's over priced mess and now this.

New Bible translation
JERUSALEM—Don Esposito announces a new Bible, the
Hebraic Roots Bible: A Literal Translation.

Mr. Esposito, senior elder of the Congregation of YHWH
Jerusalem, says the new version “is more amazing than the Dead
Sea Scrolls.”

It is a “literal translation, and we believe it to
be the closest Bible to the original language
that was written thousands of years ago.”

The Old Testament is from the “original Hebrew manuscripts”
and the NT from the “original Aramaic,” Mr. Esposito said.
For more information go to coyhwh.com.


Apostle Malm: Woman Know Thy Place!



The apostle is continuing his beat down on women today.  All of you rebellious brawling women had better know your place!

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

This is about standing up before the saints and teaching them in a group. It is about a proper following of God’s lawful chain of authority; for the husband is in authority over his wife.

This forbids a woman to enter the ministry for it is would be unseemly and unlawful for a woman to publicly teach and reprimand her husband, or the husbands of other women; when they is under there own husband’s or father’s authority.

A woman may certainly discuss the Scriptures with her father or husband, with other women, with  her children; and with the elders in the Church with the knowledge and consent of her husband.  Others, even men, may certainly go to a wise woman for advice and judgment concerning difficult things, and husbands should always see their wives as their CHIEF advisors.   The women are not to  exercise authority over their men; rather they are to advise and help when they are sought out.

Then the apostle ends with this warm gushy love note:

Love is demonstrated by seeking to please and desiring the good; of the loved one.  We, being the espoused bride of Christ, demonstrate our love by pleasing him with our attentiveness and obedience to him.  We please our espoused husband by esteeming him above ALL others! Love is an action! It is NOT a passive emotion or feeling.
My question where have we seen love in Malmism?  So far I have never seen it manifested.

Sunday, June 3, 2012

Apostle Malm: It is Disrespectful For Women To Ask Questions In Church



Women in the Church of Malm are currently being relegated to subservient levels of servitude.  The husband is lord and master of the manor and women are to follow the mans instructions without question.

Apostle Malm also says that women are never to ask questions in church.  It is disrespectful of the lord masters authority.

After spending over 40 years in the screwed up cult of Armstrongism where questioning was never allowed, I have made it a policy of telling those that I have in newcomers class at the church I am at now, that they are free to question.  Just because the preacher says something does not mean they have to agree with it.  He knows I do it too.  I tell them to question the doctrines they grew up with and teaching of churches they have come from. I let them know it is OK to question the Bible and not to take it as 100% literal.  The Bible is filled with stories, metaphors, allegories and myths.  It doesn't mean they don't have truth and meaning, but it also does not mean that it all had to literally happen. I also tell them that when they walk through the door of the church they do not need to check their brain.

The idea that women cannot speak in a church setting, ask questions, talk about God, question God, doctrine, and belief in a church setting  is appalling and ignorant.  What does Apostle Malm think the women in the New Testament era did?  They spoke out, they raised money, they paid for the spread of the gospel and even spread it themselves all without a man at their side.  It wasn't a group of grumpy Malmite men that went to the tomb of Jesus, it was women.  Women were the first to proclaim Jesus was no longer in the tomb.

Anyway, here is the apostle's directive for subservient Malmite women:

An acolyte asks:

Can a women pray and prophesy in church if she is wearing a head covering?

The apostle responds:

A woman is not to speak [as a teacher of the men, or in prayer when a man is present] in the assembly, due to the fact that doing so would be disrespectful of the man as the head of the woman. She is not even to ask a question without going to her husband first.
This is a matter of example and public discretion.

In the privacy of their own home, a woman should definitely discuss the scriptures with her parents and mate.

She may pray privately at any time, but should not lead in prayer, if her father or husband is present; the men need to learn to take the lead.
Husbands should always listen to their wives and take their advice very seriously making their wives their CHIEF advisor and confidant at all times.

More will be coming as I get into 2 Cor, Tim, Titus Peter ect. James

Then the apostle wants to reinforce his demand that subservient Malmite women wear hats in church.

An acolyte asks:

Are you saying women need to cover their heads in church? Would that be a hat, a veil, a handkerchief or what? Is not her husband her covering?
So, if a women wears a hat can she pray and prophesy in public?
As far as men having their heads covered, I understood this was a cultural situation where taking off their hats was a sign of respect.

The apostle responds
Anything modest; some hats are designed to be great attention grabbers and are anything but modest. Just use some judgment. James
and with this:

Another acolyte asks:
The covering that Paul is talking about, for a woman, is her hair not a hat.

The apostle responds:

That is just another HWA erroneous tradition: I ask you why is she to be shorn if she refuses to wear her hair then? 

The HWA hair thing makes no sense either in the language of 1 Cor or in the context; which is that BOTH male and female Jews covered their heads with a prayer shawl.

Paul was simply explaining that men need not do so, but women should continue to do so. James
 Great will be the day when these jackasses can no longer preach their message of legalistic bullshit.