Dave Pack His Dirty Secret

More Upheaval In the COG: Pastor Resigns Over Use of "Amen" at End of Prayers

It looks like another Church of God group is getting ready to split after it's pastor resigns over a controversy over the use of "amen" at the end of prayers.

Ron Harmon of The House of God located in Texas, is of the belief that using "amen" after a prayer is acknowledging the sun-god "Aman-Ra" from ancient Egypt.

If these men focused even half of their energy on Jesus instead of silliness like this then they might actually accomplish something.  But no, they cannot and will not.

July 16th 2017

Hello Mike:

Please take the following with brotherly intent.
In Reply to your letter on the term amen, I feel you have misunderstood my stance on this issue. 

I did one sermon on this and in that sermon, I told everyone it wasn't a doctrine or a edict of the church; they were free to use amen or any other phrase to end a pray, or none at all. I recommended folks doing their own study on the subject, just as I do most other things I speak about.

As far as Frank was concerned, he took it to a level where I would never have, but that was Frank.

IT"S NOT A DOCTRINE of this church. It's not written anywhere and it isn't even on the website because the old archives are listed as of now.

I agreed for your sake I wouldn't push this any further, but you seem to be insistent when there isn't any others bringing the subject up.

It leads me to ask, what do you want done?

If you want me to publicly proclaim I was wrong and Frank was wrong, that isn't going to happen, I will resign and leave the church before that happens.

As far as I'm concerned on a personal bases, I will never use the phrase amen and I will spell out to why.

It is a reaffirmation of a prayer or a sermon or statement. The ancient Egyptians used it in the exact same manner but to their sun god amen-ra, aman-ra or amun-ra, however you want to spell it, all are correct.

1. You keep referring to Revelation 3:14 as your sticking point on this.

There are at least three other bible translations that don't use the word amen.

TLB (Living Bible)

“Write this letter to the leader of the church in Laodicea: “This message is from the one who stands firm, the faithful and true Witness of all that is or was or evermore shall be,* the primeval source of God’s creation:

NLV (New Living Translation)

“Write this to the angel of the church in the city of Laodicea: ‘The One Who says, Let it be so, the One Who is faithful, the One Who tells what is true, the One Who made everything in God’s world, says this:

WE, (World English)

`Write this to the angel of the church people in Laodicea: Here are the words of the one whose name is Truth. What he says can be trusted. He is the one who began all that God made.

I don't believe for one second amen is one of Jesus names, nor is God or any other name we use and amen won't be used in His kingdom.

It is not credible that God would invoke the name of an Egyptian god when he regarded himself as the only true God and his own name as above all names. “I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other...” (Isaiah 42:8).

Even the name Lord here is improper, should actually say Yahweh.

But I don't make folks adhere to the true translations either, I even try and not say the word lord, instead I use Eternal if I remember.

In John chapter one He is called the logo's (word) and that is a correct interpretation as well.

But scriptures have been manipulated in so many areas of the bible, its really a matter of where one draws the line.

The word wasn't used before Israel went into captivity, while in captivity there is no evidence they kept their complete language pure or unbroken, it wouldn't even be practical to believe so.

It also isn't practical to assume they worshiped only the God of Israel, they didn't.

It is the reason why the true God did what He did when He brought Israel out of Egypt.

I don't want to go word for word on this with you, all I need to know is what is your solution?

I'm fine with leaving the issue as it is and not bringing it up, but if you want it expunged from Austin's lexicon and Franks archives, you'll have to address the whole Austin congregation about it.

One last thing, I don't in any way consider it blasphemous to our true Father or Christ to limit ones words he uses, especially when affirming another's prayers or statements.

Mathew 5:33 “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’ 34 But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36 Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. 37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

Mike if you feel so strongly about my stance on this, then I gladly step down and you can chart the way of the church for the future. I'm not so wrapped up in this position it would bother me to step aside at this time.

Until then, I'm glad to let those that want to use amen use it, and those that don't, not do so.

This has been my stance on the use of sacred names, and any other thing someone wants to believe.

It's my desire we can get this issue behind us and we can stay friends and fellow workers for Christ but I won't be forced to do something I don't believe in, and I wouldn't expect you or any other person to do so either.

God Bless.

Church of God News had this:

House of God 

This is pastor Ron Harmon’s letter of resignation from the House of God in Texas: 

“To The Wonderful People of the House of God: 

Unknown to most of you there has been a spiritual struggle occurring within our congregations. It was a battle not of my choosing, but it caused much tension in our home. This last Sunday at our annual meeting of the consul and ministers of the House of God, it all came to a conclusion. 

This spiritual battle has been raging behind the scenes for many years bringing me to a final conclusion. I can’t work effectively when others I work with are so consumed by my different beliefs on ending prayers, not allowing camaraderie to exist. 

As of Sunday (12th December 2017), Virginia and I are no longer members of the House of God. I won’t get into the specifics for the sake of the church, only to say the following. I cannot go against my convictions and how I see the scriptures. There are some in the leadership of the church who seem to believe my salvation is lost because of what I believe on one issue. I can only say this, you might be careful how you judge others and their salvation. 

I will be continuing the work in the ways I can from my home. I’m not sure at this time how that will manifest itself, but the fact is, I can’t stop serving God. 

I wish everyone well and God’s blessings. I’ve always tried to help make everyone’s lives a little better at the House of God and we hope you remember us fondly. Virginia and I are deeply saddened by what has transpired over the last few months. We are saddened to not be a part of your lives any longer, but we no longer feel welcomed, and we don’t go where we’re not welcomed. 

God Bless you all: Ron Harmon.” 

Gerald Weston on Yoga

Video update to the yoga comments instead of the entire mind numbing sermon

"This is something the church should not legislate on..."   but...

God Weston makes it quite clear on what LCG members should do concerning Yoga.  While he does not explicitly say what to do, the implications are very clear.

Revelatory Fun: "As Above...So Below"

Revelation 4:

The Throne in Heaven

4 "After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this.” ² At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it".

Casseiopia the Throne in the North

^{3 "}And the one who sat there had the appearance of jasper and ruby. A rainbow that shone like an emerald encircled the throne. ⁴ Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads. ⁵ From the throne came flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder."

The Throne (Casseopia) is on the sides of the North with a rainbow around it (The Milky Way)  The 24 Elders are the 24 hours in the day as divided by the longitudinal grid emanating from the North Pole. The Bear (Dipper), i.e. the Seven Spirits of God are close to the center in this view

In front of the throne, seven lamps were blazing. These are the seven spirits^[a] of God

Ursa Major-The Big Dipper-The Seven Spirits of God

Opposite the Throne Casseopia

. ⁶ Also in front of the throne there was what looked like a sea of glass, clear as crystal.

The Sea of Glass clear as crystal (The Milky Way) in front of the Throne Casseopia between it and The Seven Spirits of God (The Bear/Dipper)

"In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures, and they were covered with eyes, in front and in back. ⁷ The first living creature was like a lion, the second was like an ox, the third had a face like a man, the fourth was like a flying eagle. ⁸ Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under its wings. Day and night they never stop saying:"

The four living creatures are made up from the Constellations of the Four Seasons, in this case, Summer-Leo the Lion...and three months earlier, Spring- Taurus the Ox...and three months earlier, Winter-Aquarius the Waterman...and three months earlier, Fall-Aquila the Eagle.  Their combined wings again are the 24 hours in the day (4x6) and "covered with eyes" are the night sky stars one can see all around them.  

These creatures, representing Spring, Summer, Winter and Fall are also found in Ezekiel's visions. 

Or it's a big coincidence they match the seasonal constellations

Let me know if you'd like to hear about Revelation 12:4?

Revelation 12:4 ⁴Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born."

Hint:

Phew--close call!

Virgo, the Virgin, (upper left) slips the birth of the Sun past Serpens and Satan and is given the Wings of a Great Eagle, (Aquila the Eagle to the left) to flee to her place.

(This is also the current just before Christmas morning sky)

Or again...just an amazing coincidence

"As above...so below"

Sexual harassment and the women of "me too"

Sexual harassment and the women of "me too" 

by Greg Doudna

This is from the ACPasadenareunion site and is used by permission of Gregory Doudna.  Besides being an authority on the Dead Sea Scrolls, he is the author of the excellent book published in 2006,  "Showdown at Big Sandy: Youthful Creativity Confronts Bureaucratic Inertia at an Unconventional Bible College in East Texas"

Before our eyes there is a sea change, a threshold, seemingly a quantum level, a tipping or turning point in America, on sexual harassment, with powerful men falling right and left, with a new reality that behavior formerly often considered a joke but which caused real pain to women, no longer beyond the reach of accountability. Is this what a national repentance looks like?

In retrospect, how would WCG history and our own AC experience have been different if the unspeakable allegation concerning HWA had been known?

"Unspeakable" because it is literally unspoken, like the family secret that is never named, including in my own book "Showdown at Big Sandy", even though I knew of it and believed it was true. I have never heard it even mentioned on this forum, perhaps for similar reasons as why I simply could not bring myself to do so when I wrote my book. When I first heard the allegation long ago I felt like throwing up, a feellng which lasted for days. That it was apparently true seemed indicated on a number of grounds brought out in past issues of Ambassador Report, with a long track record of consistently highly accurate reporting. Yet I could not bring myself to name it, it was so sickening to me.

There is a European tradition that politicians can have mistresses or infidelities and no one cares so long as they are competent at their job. That is not what the current issues in America, the "me-too" stories coming out like a tsunami, seem to be about. It is rather about issues of abuses of power, and nonconsensual violation of body.

In late 1973, just as the dissident outbreak of Shreveport and then the larger regional directors of 1974 was breaking, I among a thousand others heard GTA in a sermon at Big Sandy say that there had been an early allegation of adultery against his father, HWA, back in the early days in Oregon. GTA did not say the allegation was true. In fact everyone hearing it would have assumed it was not true, a false allegation, in GTA's telling, though to the best of my memory GTA did not directly say it was false either, even though that was the default assumption. But what was that all about? I had never heard of such an allegation before regarding HWA. Barely two or three months later, Ronald Dart (resident deputy chancellor at Big Sandy) in a sermon or a student forum (I forget which it was but I was present and wrote in real-time notes the exact wording), said with emphasis: that in all of the criticisms of HWA that were being voiced by dissidents one thing that was not being raised or questioned was the content of HWA's character. "His (HWA's) character is as pure as the driven snow" said Mr. Dart with great rhetorical impact and force. I interpret that as that by early 1974 Mr. Dart had literally not yet heard the allegation.

Yet the allegation did later become known, based on GTA's telling a few people and the word was out, GTA having learned it firsthand confidentially from the victim. The allegation was never denied by HWA or the victim, and as reported by Ambassador Report, both the victim and her husband had been receiving church payments for decades, even though not employed. As the story was being voiced privately among people in contact with GTA but before it was yet publicly reported or known to church members, I remember a co-worker letter of HWA in which HWA spoke of some undefined supreme, master stroke of Satan, some utterly devastating master blow against the church which may be coming which would exceed anything the members could imagine. I wondered what was that all about? Of course HWA spoke in hyperbole in nearly every co-worker letter, so it was easy to read and dismiss that as more of the same, i.e. nothing specific. But in retrospect that comes across in a different light, like a man fearing a horrible skeleton becoming exposed. The spectre of how effective that master attack of Satan (as HWA put it) would be in HWA's telling--how many brethren HWA believed would fall away as a result--reads like a fear of the effect of a devastating, true allegation.

That is past history now. But what should--should--have been the proper response, when this allegation became known? What should ministers and members do, if it occurred today? Should HWA have been forced to resign? But, the way it was set up, HWA alone decided who should be forced to resign at his level, and everyone else should trust in God who was responsible for guiding HWA in his decisions, and God had not led HWA to decide that HWA should resign. This was believed to be God's government in operation.

I cannot imagine that I, or my father before me in Akron, Ohio, would have come into the church in the first place with a leader credibly having the nature of the allegation against HWA. It would have changed everything for me, or my father. But, when the allegation did become known, it did not change everything, in fact, outwardly and seemingly, it changed not much of anything. How could people like Meredith and other old-timers with similar mindsets, for example, still have continued to uphold HWA without addressing that? Did they think the allegation was actually fabricated? Did they think that it was irrelevant?

Toward the end of my time at AC and afterward, I discovered and read what to me were riveting writings of John Howard Yoder, a Mennonite theologian, books like "The Original Revolution", "Nevertheless", and "The Politics of Jesus". Yoder argued with great intelligence, insight, and humility the anabaptist case for Jesus as a "revolutionary pacifist", who was nonviolently upsetting the political order, that the point of Jesus was changing history by means of the church being a witness and an example in history of doing things in better ways, demonstrating more peaceful social relations internally, witnessing against war, civil disobedience like refusing to pay war taxes, standing for the poor of the world, living the sermon on the mount, returning good for evil, proclaiming Jesus's message of a biblical Jubilee of economic relations, the followers of Jesus being the mechanism for at some point bringing about the possibility of the kingdom of God on earth. It was enormously inspiring to me, my transition stage to Quakers. It was so inspiring--something real about the Gospel and the sermon on the mount read in ways I had not heard before, and the history of anabaptists, that I thought: this is real, this is so different from the barrenness of wcg spiritual culture (despite some genuinely good people). The anabaptists of the 1600s had talked the talk and walked the walk, suffering martyrdoms in large numbers for nonviolent attempts to live out the sermon on the mount of Jesus. I learned some of the anabaptists had even been sabbatarians. Anabaptists, the forerunners of today's Amish and Mennonites, Hutterites and Church of the Brethren, pacifist honorable peoples all, at the time were the radical left wing of the Protestant Reformation, hounded and killed and massacred at the behest of Reformers like Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin, all for having shockingly subversive views of equality of human beings and rejection of authority of nobles and priests and state apparatuses of such.

I applied to the Associated Mennonite Biblical Studies seminary in Goshen, Indiana, in order to study under Yoder, with a vision in my mind of truly living for God in a way that I had not found at AC. My application was rejected on the grounds that I had not completed my undergraduate degree at AC, which in any case was considered skeptically due to the lack of accreditation issue. I went on to find my roots and home among the Friends (Quakers), which were my ancestral roots which anabaptists from Germany were not. I spoke several times to Yoder personally, including at conferences where I would see him.

But in later years Mennonites have grappled with a wrenching and distressing problem involving much collective soul-searching: all the time of Yoder's brilliance at making the anabaptist case for the pacifist Jesus to the wider world, and inspiring a generation of committed pacifist Christian activists in the name of a literal interpretation of the ethics of the sermon on the mount, Yoder had been a serial assaulter of women. Not in a full-rape sense, but in repeated unwanted and disturbing physical interactions, unwanted graphic language, serially over many years despite many behind-the-scenes pleadings and appeals from administrators to stop. Meanwhile, the stories of women piled up. Eventually Yoder was disciplined and fired, but still the reasons were covered up until the point came when they no longer were covered up. Yoder died in 1997. Today, the Mennonites--good people, honest people--have sought to come to terms with Yoder's legacy, find out why this could have gone on so long, what kind of cultural changes and institutional mechanisms can protect women going forward. This is a drama I was spared by having been turned down for study for the ministry at the seminary at Goshen, Ind., where Yoder had taught.

The Mennonites had this discussion, hard as it was for those involved. It was wide-ranging, participatory, thoughtful, the women were listened to, there was repentance and there were outcomes. Have the WCG or any of the lettered successor Church of God groups had this discussion? No. Is there any mechanism by which such a discussion could even occur? It is hard to imagine. Are Church of God people better off for this "see no evil, hear no evil" practice toward iconic founder figures?