One of the more interesting ministries to spring from the decomposing corpse of the WCG is biblestudy.org, the brainchild of Alan Ruth.
Alan takes a commendably independent approach, calling on the skills of many helpful COG volunteers. Thanks to its nifty URL the site acts as a magnet for conservative Christians of all persuasions, anxious for a dollop of down-home apologetics.
While Alan is scrupulously impartial, in the sense that he doesn't endorse any specific COG group, he keeps the operation running by accepting advertising from various COG ministries including Fred Coulter, Art Mokarow, COG New World Ministries (a new splinter - at least to me - that seems to be related to CGI/ICG) and Church of God Ministries International (same background?)
Alan's website gets prominent mention in a recently published book featuring skeptical authors, including Richard Dawkins.
Everything You Know About God Is Wrong
is a compendium of anti-apologetics, published as a "Disinformation Guide." And there, on page 127, biblestudy.org along with volunteer question answerers Rick and Eileen Beltz, achieve a kind of immortality.In a section of the book by Bobbie Kirkhart (Bridging the Leap of Faith) the discussion turns to the daughters of Lot who did unto dad what no virtuous daughter would ever dream of doing. Kirkhart quotes from what might be called "the Beltz defense."
"Given the situation wouldn't you be a bit distressed and afraid of what might happen next? Lot's daughters must have thought it was the end of civilization and that they were some of the only people then living. They were obviously greatly concerned about the future of their family (and possibly the human race). This concern led them to do what they did."
Kirkhart finds their position on Lot's drunkenness even more interesting. To the question "was Lot an alcoholic?" the Beltz team replies:
"...no, he was not an alcoholic; not even close. You will find in the New Testament book of 2 Peter that Lot is considered a good man, righteous in God's eyes."
To which Kirkhart responds: "Knowledge that the two are incompatible must come as a shock to more than a few people, including George W. Bush, Ted Kennedy, and Mel Gibson."
(To which we might add Herbert W. Armstrong who, like the sodden patriarch of Sodom, even seems to have had daughter issues as well.)
67 comments:
Between offering his daughters earlier to the crowds of Sodom "to do with as you will" in order to save his good name and hospitalic ass with the "Angels" and this account of them double boinking dad, I can certainly see why Lot gets into the God's man hall of fame.
Funny how Lot gets so drunk he can't remember any of it, so he stays righteous I suppose if you don't remember. Also, what a guy to be stone cold drunk and functioning as Studly Do-A-Lot.
I'm sure he never suspected anything as the girls gave birth with no one else around as dad.
Actually it's a fantasy story to make up a good origin story for the Moabites and Ammonites, enemies of the righteous Israelites.
I'm surprised they didn't call them the Drunkabites and the Boinkanites.
No wonder Mrs. Lot turned to salt.
The girls were last known to be receiving counseling for post traumatic stress and, dad threw us to crowd abuse and assorted bad experiences with their righteous father.
Isaac was in the same facility recovering from "oh yeah, well my dad said it was just a little camping trip to the mountains' trauma.
:)
Funny you should single out Rick Belz … while he was in Port Austin, the locals called him "the Nazi" because of his stone cold, unsmiling demeanor. But even he couldn't stomach Norm Edwards' commune and left after selling many of his worldly goods to have enough funds to leave.
Dennis said:
Also, what a guy to be stone cold drunk and functioning as Studly Do-A-Lot.
During my Worldweird days I always had to put on the blinders when reading that passage (same with Peter's commentary). Any man knows that if he gets that drunk, he ain't performing nuthin' no matter how hot the chick is!
Me thinks whoever wrote that passage put that episode in there as a gag, just to let the reader know the story is only an allegory (with the true meaning long lost).
Ah, the Bible - written in long dead languages, by various and contradicting authors, using long ago metaphors and hidden jokes of unknowable comedian cultures. Yep, it sure can serve as a guide post to lunatic Christians & cults.
Philippians 4:8
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
No wait! It's too late! We've been exposed to Armstrongism!
None of the churches of godletts can ever claim to have a clue to who or what God is. This has been extremely distressing for those of us who have been among the truth seekers.
The problem seems to be two-fold:
1) If you don't obey what you know and are immoral, unethical and illegal, it's sure as death, hell, taxes, revenge and the fury of a woman scorned that people of this ilk cannot know or understand anything approaching the knowledge of a perfect righteous just God whose mercy never fails. If He exists, He would hide Himself and not be associated with religious people who embarrass anyone short of a psychopath. Witness United screeching about Xmas while they are guilty of protecting stalkers and fondlers in their midst. It's worse than that: On the stalking issue, Richard Pinelli showed up on the Sabbath before 9/11 to preach a sermon about how "God will tip over your barrel". It was a sermon directed to the married woman protesting the stalker harassing her -- accusing the victim of being ungodly. The man is a piece of work and might as well be a flaming atheist [unfortunately, most atheists are much nicer, they just want to be left alone to have a modicum of freedom from abuse].
2) There isn't one shred of accountability. Cultmeisters of every stripe can do and say anything they want without any fear from their own closely controlled and manipulated people, so they do pretty disgusting ungodly rotten things to other people. The best part is they use God as an excuse.
As Isaiah said, if they speak not according to this [God's] Word, there is no light in them.
Which might, according to Occam's Razor, account for all the darkness.
Amongst all the confusion, Everything you know about God is wrong is wrong because if there is a God, there's hardly anyone who could act as a guide to enable you to get to know God. You're on your own. Be it according to your own faith.
It's now December 23 in Kiwiland. According to Wikipedia, it is the last day of the Saturnalia. How nice that this festival should culminate with the Birthday of the Son. I'm of course referring to the son of Joseph the successor to HWA. Also in Wikipedia, Joe Tkach Junior was born on this blessed day in 1951. Happy Birthday, Joe, and to all a good night.
Stingerski said...
"Any man knows that if he gets that drunk, he ain't performing nuthin' no matter how hot the chick is!"
Well maybe Lot used some duct tape and a Popsicle stick! Works for me!!
Lot was considered "righteous" enough for God to rescue him from the city of Sodom (Gen 19:14).
Lot offered his daughters to a mob outside of his door that wanted to rape his male guests.
The decision caused conflict with many scholars indicating that Lot preferred the male companions to his own daughters. Some think the action was immoral to give your daughters to homosexual men. This is thus interpreted from a liberal point as being evidence of a woman's place in society, and giving credence to the belief that raping women was a cure for homosexuality.
Lot, as a righteous man, must have known that the homosexual men would not have been interested in his daughers therefore it strikes me that he knew that his daughers would come to no harm. Even poor Issac had to lie on sacrificial altar thinking any minute his life would be over.
Lot's daughters believed there was "no man" left on earth to give them a heir (Gen 19:31). Such was a foolish thing to think because Abraham's camp was about a day's journey away.
Lot was known to enjoy drink since his daughters knew before hand what happens to their father once he starts drinking (Gen 19:32).
Some think this shows that Lot had a special sexual relationship with his daughters before this one incident. His daughters were willing to lie with their father implying this must have happened more than once.
There is no evidence to support this happened more than the reported incident.
Sexual relations between families is the history of human race. Adam and Eve's children would have pro-created with each other. It is only later the law was changed to forbid the practice as ratified in the book of Exodus.
It is likely pre-Exodus that God certainly permitted the practice as a means of pro-creating the earth.
Lot's daughters were horney old girls for virgins, weren't they?
Then with a passed out drunk daddy they give up their virginity? And, they both get pregnant?
What are the chances that this could ever have happened, zero or none?
Both girls ovulating at the exact same time, only a 24 hour window once a month! Wow! What timing! Then they both have sons? Incredible, and I mean totally incredible!
"BS" is definitely a good title for this story.
Of course, as bible stories go, this one is about as credible as any other in the big book of fairy tales and fables.
People built a village on a pile of brimstone (sulphur) and lightning sets it on fire and everyone scatters in all directions. Those poor people could have even accidentally invented gun powder with all that sulphur and charcoal from their campfires.
That is, if the story has any basis in fact whatsoever.
Saaaay, wasn't Alan Ruth with United? Did he set up the Barnabus Ministries to help the homosexuals in the Churches of God? Or is that someone else?
Can anything good come from Michigan?
And that counts Port Austin.
While Alan Ruth hales from that part of the country, some of you may be asking, whatever happened to.... Not a question worth asking, but if you must know, the Court Settlement is settled and Norm owes Terry $45,000 or thereabouts payable beginning in 2010. Don't you just love court cases with CoGers suing CoGers?
You are probably thinking of Melvin Rhodes of Anchor.
The website no longer exists.
But you can view it through archive.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070223111603/http://www.anchorhelp.com/
It used to be
www.anchorhelp.com/
That must be "Anchor". This seems to be the reference:
anchorman16.tripod.com
It seems that Alan Ruth may have been a part of it some time ago.
Other names have popped up too in association with the effort, such as Dennis Luker.
It looks as if this is out of Michigan as well.
This presents some interesting challenges. I'm in a unique position right now, in that after 30 years, I'm once again reading my Bible, and attempting to understand it freshly, and without the corrupting influences of the HWAcaca.
Basically, I don't feel that it's unfair to use the standards of the Bible to judge the characters described in the Bible, although it is perplexing to read in the New Testament that they are either "righteous", or "after God's own heart". The stories concerning the disfunctional family of Lot bear more resemblance to Chaucer's Canterberry Tales than they do to most of the materials contained in the Bible.
Attempting to be somewhat reverent, I have to ask, what is the lesson here? Many people when they commit an especially egregious sin, assume that they are cut off from God. Did Lot simply get up the next morning, ask for forgiveness, and continue his relationship with God? That is apparently what David did. Others did not. Cain comes to mind, as does Saul. In the NT, Peter denies Christ, but then realizes what he's done, and goes on to lead and strengthen his brother disciples.
Unfortunately, we ex-Armstrongites would have the additional burden of factoring these Biblical examples into our own horrible experiences with the corrupt leaders in our past religious lives. What do these Biblical lessons imply with regard to HWA's incest and drunkenness, or GTA's drunkenness and flagrant philandering? Of course we are fortunate in that there is also the evidence trail of false prophecy (and an abundance of other bad fruit) to help us in evaluating the Armstrongs and the ACOGs. Deut. 18:22 tells us exactly what to do.
Back in the day, we were required to single source all of our theological information. But, this is now, and we have freedom. I'd like to read what some seriously credentialed and educated biblical scholars have to contribute regarding Lot and his very weird family situation before extrapolating too much from the story. As I say, this is once again all new to me, and I really don't want to use Lot's story as a kind of proof text invalidating the whole Bible.
BB
DennisDiehl said...
>>>Between offering his daughters earlier to the crowds of Sodom "to do with as you will" in order to save his good name and hospitalic ass with the "Angels" and this account of them double boinking dad, I can certainly see why Lot gets into the God's man hall of fame.<<<
Talk about the dog returning to its own vomit, and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. The fate of the rich man might be too good for you!
Talk about the dog returning to its own vomit, and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. The fate of the rich man might be too good for you!
Another non sequitur from cultmeister false apostle Tom.
It is clear that the Tomster has likely pronounced judgment upon himself, having fallen in with harlots and publicans, yet being a parasitic Pharisee stands apart all 'holier than thou'. Promoting dead false prophets in complete defiance of Deuteronomy 18:22 is hardly the way to be a man after God's own heart.
Jesus advises pulling out the plank before going after someone else's sliver. God, after all, is the judge. Usurping that particular Authority is just asking for trouble.
Legalism was the catalyst for Phariseeism, and always brings with it self-righteousness, manipulation of others, and contempt for fellow human beings.
The non-Christlike fruits of the dead false prophet are alive and well, as we can determine through the Phariseeism of his followers.
Anonymous said: "Can anything good come out of Michigan?"
Well, besides the rather dubious characters you mentioned, one really good thing that came out of Michigan is Pam Dewey and her plethora of websites listed at Youall.com. Of special interest to this group is her Nitpicker's Guide to the cog and her Isitso guide to the cults.
As to the questions raised by some about the apparent dichotomy between Lot boinking his daughters and then later being called righteous there are a couple of possibilities. The easy one is that God is merciful. The not so easy one for set in concrete cog types like Tom, is that unlike the Greek language, which has lots of other sources from which to derive a relatively true meaning, Hebrew is different. There are few other sources of ancient Hebrew, and even the rabbis argue over what the biblical accounts really mean. Rational thinkers should be content to wait to find out what the accounts really say and what the intended meaning might be. We might all be surprised to find out that the true story is quite a bit different from the one we have in our possession.
Legalism was the catalyst for Phariseeism, and always brings with it self-righteousness, manipulation of others, and contempt for fellow human beings.
It should be noted that a person does not have to be religious to be a Pharisee, but it certainly helps. No, the carnality meatheadedness is embodied rather nicely in the mental disorder [not mental illness] narcissism, that glorious catch all for the extreme self-centeredness of those who believe the entire revolves around them. The religious narcissists belief [in effect, not in declaration] that God, if He exists, is a minor player who exists merely to be the fulfiller of personal desires of the narcissist, who subjects God to every whim of selfish lust. Any God who does not comply is written off and dumped for one who is much more compliant.
And thus it is, that everything they think they know about God is Wrong. They don't worship a god, they merely use it / him only to dump it / him when it / him do not grant their magic wish fulfillment. Any defiant god will have to crawl back and beg to be let back into the inner circle of the narcissist, who, lacking any compassion or empathy, will weigh just what benefit it will be to them to determine whether or not they will let their god back into their life.
God, beware! You have been warned!
Tom Said:
"How nice that this festival should culminate with the Birthday of the Son."
Well that would be the SUN which now has stopped it's southern movement and today is the first of three days and nights in the grave, neither going south nor appearing to go north yet. Then the SUN is born of Virgo and it all starts again. How cool is that.
Joe Tkach Jr. is a Sun God!
Robert...nice try but the Lot story is a middle eastern hospitality tale and not about an entire town of homosexual men. In that culture they mistrusted strangers who were not of the town or clan and the worst they could do to them to warn them was to "rape" them or treat them like a woman. Lot was more concerned about his hospitality reputation than his daughters.
Whole towns are not gay and he did not throw out the daughters because he knew they wouldn't want women. Lame lame!
Later in the account, Lot does not want to go to Zoar because it was not his clan town and chooses rather to dot he cave thing than risk the same treatment.
Tom said:
Talk about the dog returning to its own vomit, and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. The fate of the rich man might be too good for you!
And you are one rude christian fool and I doubt WCG is all that proud to claim you either.
Though it may seem ironic, if anyone chooses to do a Bible Study on the topic, GOD HATES VIOLENCE!
That is probably the real reason for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.
God has to get violent with the violent to end the violent because that's all they understand.
OK, OK, I understand you hard headed, hard hearted rebellious Armstrongists are not convinced, so you should just consider Genesis 6 and 7.
Bob wrote: "Rational thinkers should be content to wait to find out what the accounts really say and what the intended meaning might be."
Wait? Till when? The Kingdom? This is just another way of saying "don't worry your silly little head about it."
Hardly rational thinking...
Actually an oft missed scripture about what the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were is found in Ezekiel.
Ezekiel 16:49-50
49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness (sic) of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.
Seems Ezekiel was not aware the whole town was gay.
zekiel 16:49-50
49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness (sic) of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.
Uh, Dennis, was this about Judah or the WCG under Herbert Armstrong?
God'll strike you like he did
Sodom and Glockamora
From the Wyatt Archaeological Research:
Ron Wyatt was not the first person to discover brimstone near the Dead Sea. When William Albright and Melvin Kyle set out to find the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah in 1924, they, too, found these pieces of brimstone at Southern end of the Dead Sea.
"...a region on which brimstone was rained will show brimstone. Well, it does; we picked up pure sulfur, in pieces as big as the end of my thumb. It is mixed with the marl of the mountains on the west side of the sea, and now is to be found scattered along the shore of the sea even on the east side, some four or five miles distant from the ledge that contains the stratum. It has somehow scattered far and wide over this plain." "Explorations at Sodom" by Dr. Melvin Kyle, 1928, pp. 52-53.
Pictures can be seen at www.wyattmuseum.com/cities-of-the-plain-02.htm
Corky said...
Both girls ovulating at the exact same time, only a 24 hour window once a month! Wow! What timing! Then they both have sons? Incredible, and I mean totally incredible!
"BS" is definitely a good title for this story.
----------
Have you ever dated two girls from the same small dorm? The odds of them being sync when it comes to menstrual cycle is very very high. Something about women living together in close proxmity.
Of that story, I have more trouble with wife turning into a pillar of salt and the dad throwing the gals to the mob.
The "Sin of Sodom"
Most people associate Sodom & Gomorrah with only one sinful passion- that of sexual perversion. And they were guilty of that, as are a large number of people not only today, but down through the ages. But the Bible states that their sin was something else: Ezekiel 16:49 Behold, THIS was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, PRIDE, FULNESS OF BREAD, and ABUNDANCE OF IDLENESS was in her and in her daughters, NEITHER DID SHE STRENGTHEN THE HAND OF THE POOR AND NEEDY. 50 And they were HAUGHTY, and COMMITTED ABOMINATION before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good. Here we learn that the root of their sinfulness stemmed from their great wealth which led them to idleness and a disregard for those less fortunate than they. They were full of pride and haughtiness, thinking they were better than others.
Why were they so wealthy? The mention of the "slime pits" may provide the answer for it was a most valuable commodity in those days, being used extensively all over the ancient world. Not only was it used as a coating for burnt mud bricks (as a preservative), it was used in the mortar; it was used to provide a water-tight covering for things such as the "reed ark" Moses was placed in as a baby. Even today, according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, "in its various forms bitumen is one of the most widely distributed of substances". In the Ebla tablets, one tablet listing some purchases and the price for each item in silver, shows that the highest price was paid for bitumen. And the people of these cities had only to walk out in their "front yard" and gather it. They had no reason to engage in hard work. They had a "gold mine" just there for the taking. This also explains why the kings of the great nations wanted to make them vassals- to participate in their great wealth through the extraction of tribute in the form of bitumen.
Wyatt Museum
www.pilgrimpromo.com/WAR/discovered/html/chapter07.htm
Japanese Automaker Claims First Month of Jewish Calendar!
From an obscure Church of God magazine:
And worst, the Hebrew Calendar of the Jews erroneously referred to as God's Sacred Calendar established their reckoning of time from the 7th month and called it their 1st month or New year (Rosh Hashanah) and counts back 177 days in order to determine the first month of Nissan, or subtract 163 days from the first day of the 7th month to find the day for Passover.
Tom proclaimeth:
"Talk about the dog returning to its own vomit, and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire..."
Or better yet, the whitewashed tomb receiving a fresh scrubbing and a new coat of whitewash to hide the rotting, purulent flesh within!
Paul
I ran upon some possible explanations for, and lessons from the life of Lot this afternoon.
First, he made a selfish decision in choosing what appeared to be the most fertile land for himself and his family, to the detriment of his uncle Abraham. He pitched his tent in a good agricultural area, but the people in that area were wicked people.
I can understand what happened next, because I attempted to raise a family in California, outside of Los Angeles. Lot was strong enough to resist the influences of Sodom himself, but his daughters were highly influenced by the Sodomite culture. He lost his married daughters in the destruction, because they failed to heed the warning. He also lost his wife, who failed to listen to God's instructions. He lost his wealth, the alure of which had caused him to settle in that region in the first place.
And, apparently, the younger daughters had been so corrupted by the culture in which they'd grown up, that they did what they did with their father.
Lot is considered righteous because he was deeply vexed by all of the evil he saw around him, and did not participate in it. He had a relationship with God. In spite of this, he was apparently clueless as to what had started the cycle through which he lost everything a man normally considers important in his life. It was his own selfishness, and his willingness to live amongst evil.
The Bible is often sparse in verbiage. Some reading between the lines, some imagination, and giving it the benefit of doubt can be very is helpful. Good teachers can bring it all alive for today, and provide some depth in meaning. False prophets and religious charlatans do not make very good teachers, although there were certainly some good people accidentally caught up in the power structure of WCG.
BB
"God has to get violent with the violent to end the violent because that's all they understand."
Right! In the same way that God loved us so much he created us with a sinful nature and condemned us to death just so he could die and save us because he loves us so much! So very simple!
Paul
Robert, you might want to reconsider believing that Ron Wyatt is anything but a huckster.
Doug...you need to find the balance between a comment and that which will throw us into a coma
Wow, I REPENT of questioning the claims of Ron Wyatt!
And, Pam Dewey was VERY naughty to say what she did about him in her Field Guide.
Did you know that Ron Wyatt discovered:
*Noah's Ark
*"Anchor stones" used by Noah for the ark
*The Post-Flood house and tombs of Noah and his wife
*The location of Sodom and Gomorrah
*Sulfur balls from the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah
*The point of the Israelites' crossing of the Red Sea in Exodus
*Debris from the pursuing army of Pharoah at the bottom of the sea
*The site of the Biblical Mt. Sinai
*A chamber at the end of a maze of tunnels under Jerusalem containing artifacts from Solomon's temple
*The Ark of the Covenant
*The stones on which God carved the Ten Commandments
*The exact site of the crucifixion of Jesus
*An earthquake crack under the crucifixion site made at the time of the death of Jesus
*Blood of Jesus, which dripped down this crack onto the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant, located in a chamber directly beneath the cross
???????
Wowie zowie, WHAT A GUY!
I'll bet that educators(such as those at Living University), who engage in good scholarship, will find Ron Wyatt to be a source of wisdom!
And those Yale lackeys wouldn't know good scholarship(such as Ron Wyatt's) if it poked them in the eye!
Byker Bob,
To add to your scenario, and continue to read between the lines [with a little help from the Book of Jasher, Chapters 16, 18 and 19].
After Lot looked for the good deal and selfishly took the offer from his uncle Abraham, Lot got into a bunch of trouble and Abraham had to bail him out.
Apparently, Abraham had taught Lot in the ways of the Lord and Lot learned and respected what he had been taught, but like many who were second generation Christians, the faith and commitment was nowhere near as great as those preceding.
Lot had arrived in the country of Sodom and Gomorrah with great flocks, herds and possessions, as it were, a blessing of prosperity from the Lord for his own keeping of righteousness, but more the righteousness of Abraham. At first, he lived outside the city. As time went on, he move into the city. As he became more and more assimilated, it appears that he even became one of the judges in the gate. It looks like he was much diminished as time went on and he moved into the city proper.
Lot started with great possessions and blessings. In the end, he ended up with only the clothes on his back and two of his daughters.
My take on this is that some of us have started out small, grew in blessings and prosperity. Then we looked to those around us, and, as it were "moved into the city". Maybe we weren't totally a part of it, but a lot rubbed off. In compromising, many of us have lost much and may escape with a lot less than what we had to begin with in our compromises to "fit in" and go along to get along.
Few people, even the most skeptical regarding Wyatt's more controversial claims, have been willing to label the man an outright charlatan and fraud.
Just an unbalanced sincere nut -- and not one real shred of proof he found Noah's Arc.
Half asleep while the TV was playing "Raiders of the Lost Arc" and dreamed all this up? He was an anesthesiologist after all.
But then we don't have to take the wayback machine to 1999 and before to encounter CoGer types who are looking for the perfect red heifer.
Nuts. All of them nuts.
Mel,
You might also want to Google "Michael Rood".
Both of these guys have/had good intentions, in that they wanted to put together archaeological evidence to support events described in the Old Testament of the Bible. They definitely have their followers, and there are tours of the Holy Land based on their work.
However, while the sulphur balls or brimstone are real, much of the balance of their "research" is questioned by serious archaeologists. In order to support what is described in the Bible, everything's got to be kept on a "real" basis. Otherwise, it becomes simply another deception, or way to manipulate people who basically just want to believe and feel that they are part of something.
I believe in the scientific method. I think it applies to every branch of science, and can and should be used in evaluating the Bible as well. Much of Ron Wyatt's work does not survive scrutiny. But, he's got enough of the basics that they become a good starting point.
BB
Yes, I'm aware of Michael Rood.
Nuts.
And though I'm aware that he and Ron Wyatt may both be sincere, they're both nuts.
Unfortunately, "nuts" and "sincerity" sometimes are adjoined.
Herb may have been sincere, too- I don't know. Perhaps Charles Manson was as well.
I subscribe to the idea that such people are truly very sick, mentally speaking, so I can't see pursuing Wyatt's stuff(or using it as a "starting point") because "he's got enough of the basics that they become a good starting point", as you say, because I'm not aware of any foundation of truthful basics that's Wyatt's.
Bamboo_bends said...
Have you ever dated two girls from the same small dorm? The odds of them being sync when it comes to menstrual cycle is very very high. Something about women living together in close proxmity.
Of that story, I have more trouble with wife turning into a pillar of salt and the dad throwing the gals to the mob.
Yeah, I've heard that old wive's tale but I had 3 daughters and a wife whose periods did not sync. I also worked in a factory with a lot of women whose periods did not sync. either. It only appears that way once in a great while and that's all. Some will be starting and some will be in the midst and some will be ending and not really in sync. at all.
The trouble I have with the story most is a passed out drunk having sex - which I know is impossible. Especially twice!
>>>In a section of the book by Bobbie Kirkhart (Bridging the Leap of Faith) the discussion turns to the daughters of Lot who did unto dad what no virtuous daughter would ever dream of doing.<<<
In response to Gavin's question, "define the non-spiritual?" I cited the relevant passage from Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians, which clearly states that it is impossible for the "natural man" to understand the bible. So with this in mind, it would be pointless to post a detailed exposition of the events relating to Lot and his daughters, as it won't be understood by the carnally minded, who are already hostile to the divine origin of the Scriptures.
However, Blaise Pascal's summary of the story of Lot and his daughters is succinct and apropos thus: "In the sacrament of penance it is not absolution alone that remits sin, but contrition, which, however, is not genuine unless it seeks the sacrament.
Likewise, it is not the nuptial blessing which excludes sin from the act of generation, but the desire to beget children for God, which, however, is not genuine except in marriage.
And as the contrite man without the sacrament is better disposed to receive absolution than is the impenitent with the sacrament, so also the daughters of Lot, for example, who had only the desire for children, were more chase without marriage than are married people without the desire for children."
Pascal's summary should send shock waves through the hearts of those couples who are practising child prevention under the guise of family planning.
PS. I note someone else is also posting posting under the name of "Tom." I hope people can tell the difference.
DennisDiehl said...
>>>And you are one rude christian fool and I doubt WCG is all that proud to claim you either.<<<
And you are very kind and polite to Mr. Armstrong, the characters and the teachings of the bible.
Catholic Tom said....
However, Blaise Pascal's summary of the story of Lot and his daughters is succinct and apropos thus: "In the sacrament of penance it is not absolution alone that remits sin, but contrition, which, however, is not genuine unless it seeks the sacrament.
Likewise, it is not the nuptial blessing which excludes sin from the act of generation, but the desire to beget children for God, which, however, is not genuine except in marriage.
And as the contrite man without the sacrament is better disposed to receive absolution than is the impenitent with the sacrament, so also the daughters of Lot, for example, who had only the desire for children, were more chase without marriage than are married people without the desire for children."
Pascal's summary should send shock waves through the hearts of those couples who are practising child prevention under the guise of family planning.
Monthy Python's summary on the subject can be found here.
PS. I note someone else is also posting posting under the name of "Tom." I hope people can tell the difference.
Well, no. Is there any difference? Does it make a difference?
Self-righteousness comes in many different packages but it's still the same product.
was Lot an alcoholic?
The James Milam centers have a test for that. Too bad Lot isn't alive to take it or we could have direct evidence. Anything else is mere speculation for which there can be no real pragmatism because there isn't enough evidence.
An interesting question develops though, in the reference to Herbert Armstrong and "sodden patriarch of Sodom": Did Herbert Armstrong preside over his own Sodom and Gomorrah? The question is not rhetorical, since Herbert Armstrong himself did label Ambassador College as "Satan's College". Since he was the Chancellor, just who would be responsible for that? [Now that is a rhetorical question.]
After spending 40 years trying to make sense out of a completely dysfunctional environment, the only conclusion to which I can come is that it isn't worth trying to do so. The best approach to take, if one is interested in such things, is Byker Bob's.
On the wall of weirdness, it's still a curiosity that any CoG would play
Herbert Armstrong's sermons 20 years after he was dead for Sabbath Services:
Why the Church 2007-12-15
[at the bottom of the page].
It's amazing that CoGs still do this in an environment which springs "from the decomposing corpse of the WCG".
The CoGs don't need a fresh life. It's way beyond that. Full replacement is the only real alternative. It might be well to look for stones to be raised up instead of continually turning them over to see what crawls out from underneath.
[Still ROFL over Japanese Automaker Claims First Month of Jewish Calendar! Nearly as good as "The Pasture General's Report:!]
Will the real Tom please stand up, please stand up!
Tom said...
>>>It's now December 23 in Kiwiland. According to Wikipedia, it is the last day of the Saturnalia. How nice that this festival should culminate with the Birthday of the Son. I'm of course referring to the son of Joseph the successor to HWA. Also in Wikipedia, Joe Tkach Junior was born on this blessed day in 1951. Happy Birthday, Joe, and to all a good night.<<<
************************************
I, Tom Mahon didn't post this.
Tired Skeptic said...
>>>After spending 40 years trying to make sense out of a completely dysfunctional environment, the only conclusion to which I can come is that it isn't worth trying to do so.<<<
Environments are not dysfunctional, the people are. So you have spent 40 years wasting your time. No wonder you are a nameless "tired skeptic."
In the presence of such appalling ignorance, I tend to feel very sick!
Mr. Mahon, sir.
May I humbly suggest that you change your screen name? Deleting one letter from Tired Skeptic's name would do the job, and would provide a deep understanding of your basic frame of mind.
Tired Septic is the most suitable name I can visualize for you. It's perfect!
Just a short note to wish all of you regulars a peaceful and restful week no matter what you do or don't do.
I consider you all my friends, mentors, scribes, pharisees and butt-u-sees in my life as there is room for all!
AW has given a me an outlet to think through my own experience here at Earth School 1. I apologize for any of my own snarkiness along the way this past year spoken in the heat of discussion.
You know me...we're all the same path, just strung out at different places along the way.
Warm regards to all
Den
The strains of Stille Nacht, Heilige Nacht are wafting through the atrium of our local bank.
They should have added violins.
I trust that our readership will be observing Heiligabend in their part of the world.
And don't forget, of course, to listen to Her Majesty's seasonal message on You Tube.
Julhälsningar
Frohe Weihnachten
Jorgheinz
Jorgheinz
Google "dysfunctional environments".
The whole world disagrees with Tom Mahon.
And so does the Bible: According to Scripture this is the "present evil world" -- and that is a dysfunctional environment.
But then,
1) Tom Mahon is dysfunctional;
2) Tom Mahon makes up definitions;
3) Tom Mahon condemns people according to his perverted and corrupted definitions;
4) Tom Mahon shows his hideous ignorance married to his arrogance by scoffing at the people he has just labeled with his dysfunctional definitions.
Tom Mahon is attempting to extend his fact free dysfunctional environment to us.
Tom Moron is half right: He's dysfunctional [and maybe not even a person, since he seems to be a narcissist] and he's living in a dysfunctional environment which can never work.
It's time for Tom Mahon to repent: He represents what is wrong with Armstrongism.
I've not been wasting my time over the past 40 years: I've learned what a waste of flesh people like Tom are.
Yowzaa! I just Googled "dysfunctional family". At the top of the list was a link for the Wikipedia article on that topic.
Would you believe, the Wiki writeup listed virtually all of the horrible symptomatic behavior of the Worldwide Church of God?
And, though I wasn't around for the Tkach era, first person testimony on this and other recovery sites leads me to believe that the symptoms persist to this day.
This is shocking! (well, actually not really.) Seeing as how WCG was extended to us as being our "new" family, it is no wonder so many have become disillusioned, and are in search of new answers and/or personal repair. What the article implies is that if certain practices exist in a family (substitute "church", the kids (brethren) don't have a ghost of a chance.
Sidebar to Tom: Ever wonder why you and your ideas never seem to gain any traction here?
BB
I think John Trechak was one of the first (1997) to liken the WCG and its daughters as one huge dysfunctional family modeled after HWA and Loma's relationship.
The alcoholic father (and son), family incest, a sex avoiding mother who covers for the father's abuses, children who are sheilded about what really goes on, a father neglected but mother-favored son who turns to find solace in the arms of women everywhere (like Bill Clinton) who is given far more leniency than he should have because of his own father's fear of being caught out, until the scrutiny gets a little too close to home and he exiles the son. The daughter victim turns her anger towards daddy's pocketbook and extracts the last drop of vengence from him in cash payments and Church purchased real estate sold below cost. On and on the behavior goes.
Shift Loma to the Church at large, and presto! You got everything we witnessed over the years.
Who needs Catholicism when we had so much drama at home?
The best moniker Tom could use is Dysfunctional Tom.
Throughout Scripture, the picture becomes very clear, summed up nicely in James 4:6 -- God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
Jesus made it clear that God the Father can deal with prostitutes, publicans, sinners of every stripe. The only class of people God doesn't seem to be able to make any inroads with are the arrogant. Examples of this are King Saul, Satan the Devil, Ananias and Sapphira, Jezebel. God even softened to Ahab when he became sorrowful and King Manasseh was humbled and reformed. The Bible is filled with cautionary tales against the arrogant and Jesus warned the Pharisees that they were in danger of hell fire.
But fools like Tom ignore Scripture and fulfill the role of being the servant of Satan: He lies and practices deception, he proclaims his own righteousness. Worse, he is the accuser of the brethren and, like the Devil, has accused very godly people falsely. He has not repented of this behavior, though he has been warned repeatedly.
Because judgment is not executed speedily, he finds those who warn him to turn from his wicked evil ways as simpletons and finds reasons in his own vain arrogance to ignore admonitions to righteousness. If Scripture is true, he will come to no good end. He will be without excuse. In the unlikely event that Scripture isn't true or is inapplicable for some unknown reason, there is always Karma, which no one really escapes.
As a godly person who is appalled by the terrible example of Armstrongists in general and people like Roderick Meredith and Tom [cut, evidently from the same cloth] in particular, it is tremendously disgusting to encounter such defiant persons. It should be noted that Roderick Meredith claims he has never committed any major sin, making the mistake that if you have not committed fornication or adultery, you're pretty much perfect, and missing the obvious: Bearing false witness against God by being a false prophet and robbing AC students blind by stealing their good reputation. One wonders how many people died through depraved indifference. Depravity doesn't have to include sex. These sorts of people feel free to criticize others as long as they are certain the victims can't bite back, but are utter cowards when they face superior forces. Roderick Meredith, for example, was so very bold to declare the United States was corrupt and subject to God's punishment, but utterly silent about Herbert Armstrong and GTA when his salary depended on it -- a true measure of hypocrisy.
It is doubtful that God would prefer to spend eternity for such people. The rest of us sure wouldn't.
Tom said I was a vomiting dog and wallowing pig....but in the spirit of the Birth of the Sun, I feel compelled to forgive him. But he hurt my feelings :)
I had a great talk with Richard Plache today!
Tired Skeptic,
Try this on for size....
The Earth is degenerating today. Bribery and corruption abound. Children no longer obey their parents, every man wants to write a book, and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching.
*Assyrian tablet, c. 2800 BC
Chicken Little's Pessimism:
Scream that we live in the worst of all possible worlds and things are still getting even worse. We are all going to Hell in a bucket.
This technique is of course simply the opposite of the Pollyanna Ploy. Ignore all good news and emphasize the negative.
Then we have these sort of character here: "Argue Inevitability"
Declare that something is inevitable, or unavoidable. This technique can weaken opposition to a certain plan or suggested course of action.
"It's Our Destiny."
"It's fate. It's inevitable."
"It's the unavoidable consequence of things that have already been done."
"It's the Force Of History." -- "Communism teaches us that we must overthrow the rich people and seize all of their property and kill them all and spread Communism everywhere because Dialectical Materialism teaches us that the Revolution of the Proletariat is inevitable -- the 'Force of History' cannot be stopped."
"History is on our side."
"It's God's Will."
Nut case Tom,
Consider...
People stay trapped in cults, or trapped in illusions, because they don't really want to know the truth:
Sometimes, they are afraid to know the truth.
They fear that their world will fall apart if they stop believing certain things, or admit the truth of other things. That is one of the beliefs with which they got programmed -- the idea that if they don't believe they will lose their ticket to the kingdom, or something else really bad will happen to them. One of the things that cults do is implant phobias about leaving the cult, or learning the truth about the cult.
They are afraid of losing their status or membership in the group They are afraid that they will be shunned and ostracized if they don't believe the same things as the other people around them. And they are just plain afraid of being alone.
They fear that they will have to leave the cult if they stop believing in it, and they will stop believing in it if they learn a bunch of negative things about it. ("Then what will I do with my life?!") So they plug their ears and close their eyes, and play "Hear no evil, see no evil..."
Thanks to AG for this!
What I want to know is how come churches (like the Southern Baptists) and others condemn homosexuality when it is a levitical law outside of the Ten Commandments written along side the statutes and judgments?
Do they say that it is moral law written in the New Testament by Paul (Romans 1)?
Is the levitical law on homosexuality a moral or ceremonial law? If it is a moral law how come it is not in the Ten Commandments?
And how come all the other laws around the law of homosexuality in Leviticus are taught that they are abolished when this one isn't?
Has anyone actually ever studied into it?
KScribe,
Is that agreement about the world being dysfunctional or not? I think I agree with you. I just can't tell.
Given that Radical Islam saw to destroying the Twin Trade Towers on 9/11/2001, it really does seem the world is more or less dysfunctional over all. Maybe the Assyrians were a bit ahead of us.
As has been pointed out, we don't have to leave Armstrongism to find dysfunction. An objective look from the inside seems sufficient.
I don't believe in inevitability... it's just that too many people seem too lazy to go out and transform the world and let the dysfunctional propagate their dysfunction. If we had a will, we could do stuff like take down cult leaders.
No, wait. You did that once already. Heck of a video!
Sometimes, they are afraid to know the truth.
Yes, sometimes. But for narcissists and psychopaths, there's no fear -- just games, as we have observed with Tom.
Robert,
In the realm of religion loosely based on the Bible -- in the sense of proof texting -- there are so many assumptions that people would like you to make, which have no objective presence.
For example, while it may be true that the Holydays may truly map to "a plan of God", nowhere but nowhere, any place in the Bible is there one shred of evidence that the priests, prophets, Apostles ever mapped, say for example, the Last Great Day with the Second Resurrection. It's not there. Won't find it. Oh, people create fictions around the idea that the Epistles teach it and the Scripture "interprets itself" but it doesn't really. This is just an idea which is not -- and note this carefully -- directly supported by the Bible. Robert Dick has already covered this, for you people in United.
That doesn't mean it isn't true, it's just that you can't use Scripture to directly objectively show it is true. There has to be a lot of assumptions based on leaps of imagination to connect the dots.
So it is with homosexuality. The words "homosexual" or "homosexuality" are not to be found in Scripture. You could say there are principles which forbid it in the Bible, such as "flee fornication". The Old Testament does call it "an abomination" so it would probably not be a good idea to flaunt it before God.
Nevertheless, it is still analogy, simile [and often hyperbole] to go from a man not to be with another man as with a woman to the screeching inbred extremists claiming God hates America because there are homosexuals in the military. One could just as easily say that God hates this hate group because they eat pork. Or maybe the question of inbreeding could be raised about the group, because it certainly looks like the shallow end of the gene pool.
Assumptions.
Not a lot of proof.
Blogger Robert said...
"What I want to know is how come churches (like the Southern Baptists) and others condemn homosexuality when it is a levitical law outside of the Ten Commandments written along side the statutes and judgments?"
Robert, like armstrongism, they (religious groups) attempt to follow the "whole law" as they pick and choose what they declare to be of God. That is the nice thing about legalism. You can pick and choose anything and justify it by scripture, that is if it has been rubber stamped as "Approved" by the messianic guru!
Take "War and Peace." If you and I (the gurus) made it a holy book, how many different religious interpretations would it be subject to? How many superfluous intellectual arguments would follow a thousand years later?
The answer depends on the brand of legalism and the doctrines that the guru chooses to embrace. For whatever serves the purpose of the guru and the power structure within, serves only for the purpose of the guru himself. Hence, our new church doctrines!
Welcome to the cult brother.
Rev. Kscribe.
you are a body part A
Post a Comment