tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post5001580907652943888..comments2023-11-05T20:19:44.812+13:00Comments on Ambassador Watch: The Art of Foolish PreachingGavinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060097218905523899noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-88210976571472204162009-03-02T02:52:00.000+13:002009-03-02T02:52:00.000+13:00I have been free of the church for about four year...I have been free of the church for about four years now. Whenever I have moments of questioning whether or not it was the right decision, or if I should ever consider returning to church (or religion of any kind), I just remind myself of the Armstrong directives: <BR/>(1) “Don’t believe me, believe the Bible!”<BR/>(2) “If you find me being untrue to the Word of God, reject me as God’s apostle!”<BR/>(3) “Truth only comes into the Church through apostles.”<BR/>Even if circumstances in my life were to ever again point me in the direction of a “higher power,” I will never again do any of the following: <BR/>(1) Expect to find all (or any) answers in a book supposedly written under “divine inspiration” (There may be a god, but he will have to speak plain English to me this time around – no “Verily, verily,” thank you very much).<BR/>(2) Look for a church (or any other organization) that has the right version of those answers (There may be a god, but if he wants to play “hide and seek,” I’m not interested.)<BR/>(3) Send one thin dime to any church anywhere in support of their “Work” (Where is THEIR faith?)<BR/><BR/>I currently consider myself agnostic. God or no god, the world is what it is. There are those who believe that it is impossible to have morals without god. The problem with that is that there is no lack of immorality among believers. Whether or not every agnostic/atheist follows some sort of “golden rule” simply by force of conscience, I can’t say. But I do know that I personally don’t need a book to tell me that I should treat people the way I myself wish to be treated (especially if the book itself is replete with examples of “Do as I say, not as I do…”). Not that I live by that perfectly, but from my experience I have learned that if there is a god, he cares more about days and money than about people’s lives. The Armstrongists would declare that god is simply “hands off” for now – except, of course, when it comes to rigging political elections (“installing and removing leaders”) in order to “prove” that we can’t rule ourselves. (??) And then there’s that popular fallback: “God isn’t judging the world now” – except for certain segments of the population. (But, of course, AIDS is just a “natural effect of an unnatural act.” God expects us to procreate; that’s why he intervenes in each and every abortion attempt or miscarriage…)<BR/><BR/>Anyway, that’s my two cents for the day…nuclearsmilehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02123469469162476605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-82864113970175915132009-02-16T08:18:00.000+13:002009-02-16T08:18:00.000+13:00Hats off to you , Dennis.It was like listening to ...Hats off to you , Dennis.<BR/><BR/>It was like listening to it again. LOL<BR/><BR/><BR/>Dill WeedAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-45869741164487014372009-02-15T16:33:00.000+13:002009-02-15T16:33:00.000+13:00Caution - re: Dave and the numbers racketI watched...Caution - re: Dave and the numbers racket<BR/><BR/>I watched Dave Pack's "broadcast" on Tithing, and, ho-hum, the churches don't teach it (really?) or got it wrong (only 10%) etc.<BR/><BR/>Then I finally got around to Doc Martin's <I>Tithing Dilemna</I>. Interesting and detailed stuff, and it shows how we fell for Herb's triple-tithing phantasy. Then watching Dave's Tithing pt 2, rather than same old, it was hilarious, using the arguments the late doc said would be used.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-75533572866450824832009-02-15T12:11:00.000+13:002009-02-15T12:11:00.000+13:00PH "too many pious singles"Perhaps I mixed with th...PH <I>"too many pious singles"</I><BR/><BR/>Perhaps I mixed with the "wild bunch" -- <I>pious</I>, but wild...<BR/><BR/>Another gem I overheard was if, umm, self-abuse was okay if you were thinking about your wife. Once again, these guys weren't married...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-89441169559329724192009-02-15T06:47:00.000+13:002009-02-15T06:47:00.000+13:00Herbert would be proud of Ronnie,"this is my belov...Herbert would be proud of Ronnie,"this is my beloved son in whom I'm well pleased." carry on Ron fleece the flock.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-50547736208856189702009-02-15T04:40:00.000+13:002009-02-15T04:40:00.000+13:00Dennis said, "A man that talks so much about humil...Dennis said, "A man that talks so much about humility is struggling, IMHO, with his ego and self importance. Kinda like Dave Pack saying he is "not about numbers," when I have known Dave personally to be about nothing but "the numbers" and I can give you amazing examples of such behaviors." <BR/><BR/>I agree with the statement on Dave Pack. I was with his group for 3+ years and I can tell you that he really "blows" the "growth" way out of proportion. Tithing is tied into just about every sermon that the members hear; if you do not tithe, basically your eternal life is at stake. If he is caught doing something wrong or illegal he hides behind his booklet "Should Accusers Be Answered?"; Most of his faithful first time staff (and quite a few members) in RCG are about 90% of them gone (Kinda like Hitler's people who helped him into power).<BR/><BR/>Dennis, I do read a lot of your articles, even though I may not completelty agree with you on everything, you still have a good sense about you.Cautionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16003995958709395329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-63836884995911970282009-02-15T00:29:00.000+13:002009-02-15T00:29:00.000+13:00"....they would be allowed to be married for one w...<EM>"....they would be allowed to be married for one week before their entry into "the kingdom"."</EM><BR/><BR/>I thought all the singles were supposed to take solace in the fact that they were part of "the bride of christ"??<BR/><BR/>Or maybe I just hung out with too many pious singles.......Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-79195664097998725302009-02-14T20:20:00.000+13:002009-02-14T20:20:00.000+13:00Well, apparently by the time the '60s rolled aroun...Well, apparently by the time the '60s rolled around, members' and ministers' imaginations had had an opportunity to run wild with all of this numerology, because in Bible Study, sermons, and even AC Bible classes, some Ross Perot-like charts and timelines were trotted out on a regular basis. They all seemed to support 1972-1975.<BR/><BR/>There was a dichotomy aspect to all of this, too! On one hand we were continuously subjected to end-time fever, yet the building program on campus ran full steam ahead as if the end were never going to come! Still, I remember some of the unordained students purchasing automobiles upon graduation, and speculating that they'd probably last them until the end.<BR/><BR/>But, the speculative nature of the RCG during the '50s does not surprise me in the least, since David Jon Hill wrote in his memoirs concerning students in class speculating about linguistics in Europe supposedly tracing the wanderings of the lost tribes of Israel, and then finding that these ended up in the USBCIP booklet. And, then there was Loma Armstrong's famous reading of a certain National Geographic, resulting in the Petra doctrine.<BR/><BR/>OOAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-75430411871534654752009-02-14T15:35:00.000+13:002009-02-14T15:35:00.000+13:00"I don't recall hearing anything from the pulpit o...<EM>"I don't recall hearing anything from the pulpit on that subject, to be fair about it though...just from the, shall we say, less 'balanced' in the congregation."</EM><BR/><BR/>The planetary alignments, and who can forget Halley's Comet?! It wasn't preached from the pulpit, but a large enough segment of the lay-ministry in my congregation certainly spread the feeling amongst the membership that these events was god's way of sending cosmic signals.<BR/><BR/>Some twenty years since Halley graced our skies last, and the planets all lined up, and no Kingdom yet.<BR/><BR/>They may not have been setting dates by the time I was born into the church, but I can certainly remember them preaching about Petra!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-65803706980513550832009-02-14T15:15:00.000+13:002009-02-14T15:15:00.000+13:00** 1972 was figured from the 7 times of the gentil...** 1972 was figured from the 7 times of the gentiles in Daniel (2520 years). **<BR/><BR/>Well Corky, <B>sort of</B>. <BR/><BR/>Armstrong said he began his "ministry in 1934, exactly 100 "time cycles" after Jesus' resurrection, with each time cycle being 19 years. (Hey, this made for really good Armstrongology.)<BR/><BR/>Now then, God had alloted Armstrong just two time cycles to preach the gospel, which takes us to 1972. Add in 3+ years for the Great Trib, and there you have the date of 1975.<BR/><BR/>But wait, there's more! Originally God had only alloted Armstrong one time cycle of 19 years for preaching the gospel. So, 1934 + 19 = 1953. But when this date came and went (and no Beastie Power was yet in existence) Armstrong had another "revelation" that extended this "mission" for one more time cycle.<BR/><BR/>And that's when I got involved in his religious schtick. :-(<BR/><BR/>And when that date came and went . . . well . . . some of us started looking for the end of the <B>3rd</B> time cycle, or 1991. Or the 4th time cycle, ending in 2008. Or the 5th time cycle, ending in 2027.<BR/><BR/><B><I>"A religious sucker is born every minute!"</I></B><BR/> - P.T. Armstrong (Herb's long lost circus cousin).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-77498129816121375292009-02-14T15:09:00.000+13:002009-02-14T15:09:00.000+13:00Agent Double O, I'm not covering for HWA or playin...Agent Double O, I'm not covering for HWA or playing revisionist games. I was a fairly early student at AC and heard this talk on campus during the mid 50s, long before the 1972-1975 dates "failed." The title, 1975 in Prophecy, was chosen for its eye-catching qualities and never was intended to set dates.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, we had no scarcity of superstitious folks, including Gerald Waterhouse, who assigned prophetic significance to virtually anything, from the names of Pasadena restaurants to the names of Popes (and all points inbetween).<BR/><BR/>One minister told us of demonic influence in the name of a California town where Holydays were being observed. Lodi is Idol spelled backwards, and he could feel the sinister influences in the air around us. Shucks, maybe he was right -- but I'd not want to submit that concept to peer review. And please don't tell him that god is dog spelled backwards.<BR/><BR/>If local ministers were rolling on that bandwagon, then many in their congregations might tragically have fallen heir to the same nonsense. By now one trusts that they've learned how empty that kind of trust can be. But that doesn't change the fact that the booklet with 1975 on its cover, in big red letters, was no more intended to set firm dates than Orwell's 1984.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-53179846195423201222009-02-14T14:42:00.000+13:002009-02-14T14:42:00.000+13:00Dennis mentioned Bathsheba in his article and whil...Dennis mentioned Bathsheba in his article and while her taking a bath was the what some called the reason for her name Willie Dankenbring says she was descended from Sheba. Bathsheba meaning daughter of sheba. He links Solomon as a descendant of Sheba or Ethiopia. The article is about the current president so I will not go any further on that subject.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-4350742670634077982009-02-14T14:06:00.000+13:002009-02-14T14:06:00.000+13:00Corky said, “It wasn't just the booklet, 1975 in P...Corky said, “It wasn't just the booklet, 1975 in Prophecy, it was all the sermons about those same dates and other booklets with the same dates.”<BR/><BR/>MY COMMENT - I agree with Agent Double O Soul, Charlie and Corky. <BR/><BR/>In addition, as we were repeatedly told, 1972 was two 19 year time cycles from the start of the “Philadelphia era” in 1934 when HWA went on KORE radio in Eugene Oregon. There was no doubt tom those who lived and witnessed the WCG at that time that 1972 was a literal deadline date when the tribulation would begin, and then Christ would return in 1975. <BR/><BR/>RichardAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-48053821990512559102009-02-14T12:57:00.000+13:002009-02-14T12:57:00.000+13:00OO - "pleasures of marriage" -- always the current...OO - <I>"pleasures of marriage"</I> -- always the currently dominant thought of lads in the WCG...<BR/><BR/>Along with the lay interest and misunderstanding of the then soon-coming <I>syzygy</I>, some young (and need I say unmarried) men had another twist on doctrine. As marriage was pushed so strongly, they speculated that on Christ's return, they would be allowed to be married for <I>one week</I> before their entry into "the kingdom".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-33225403960994794072009-02-14T03:45:00.000+13:002009-02-14T03:45:00.000+13:00It wasn't just the booklet, 1975 in Prophecy, it w...It wasn't just the booklet, 1975 in Prophecy, it was all the sermons about those same dates and other booklets with the same dates.<BR/><BR/>1972 was figured from the 7 times of the gentiles in Daniel (2520 years). Too bad there are some here with such bad memories that they can't remember all the preaching about 1972 and Petra.Corkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15894537940881776504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-23482504791408904252009-02-14T03:00:00.000+13:002009-02-14T03:00:00.000+13:00If 1975 was not a firm date, that "fact" was certa...If 1975 was not a firm date, that "fact" was certainly lost on our family, and our circle of Radio Church of God friends. My siblings and I grew up "knowing" that we probably would never know the pleasures of marriage, seeing as we'd be in the "place of safety" prior to or early into adulthood, to be instantly changed into spirit beings in 1975. <BR/><BR/>I can see where revisionist white-washers "need" to believe that all of the talk of 1975 was not solid prophecy, and to compare it all to the Jetsons, but that was the later spin which was put upon this massive failure of Herbert W. (I am not a prophet) Armstrong's false prophecies.<BR/><BR/>I submit that it would be educational to read the Wikipedia article on HWA, and then read the complete file behind the article. That will provide insight as to the lengths people will go to rehabillitate their "Apostle", despite his massive failure in nearly all ways except financial.<BR/><BR/>00Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-30260482407082030412009-02-14T02:51:00.000+13:002009-02-14T02:51:00.000+13:00Anon 10:46,I have no doubt that armstrong never be...Anon 10:46,<BR/><BR/>I have no doubt that armstrong never believed in 1972 ro 1975, especially given the fact that he was really pushing the building program at the time. 1972 and 1975 were pushed hard on the membership though...It was the best way to keep the seats filled and the tithes, offerings, and building fund donations rolling in.<BR/><BR/>It is amazing what people will give and believe from a man clutching a bible.<BR/><BR/>There was even a fair amount of rumblings within the church about what could possibly happen on that day back in the 80's when all the planets in our solar system were 'aligned'. I don't recall hearing anything from the pulpit on that subject, to be fair about it though...just from the, shall we say, less 'balanced' in the congregation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-42057189429742801902009-02-13T22:46:00.000+13:002009-02-13T22:46:00.000+13:00Anon 5:51, your info may well be better than mine....Anon 5:51, your info may well be better than mine. What I mainly remember was your point as well, that HWA's 1975 was no more intended as a firm date than the Jetson 1975 or the Orwell 1984. It just got a lot of undue attention, and still does, completely without merit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-79165797379869600352009-02-13T17:51:00.000+13:002009-02-13T17:51:00.000+13:00Anon 1:23 re: 1975I wrote for 1975 around 1967. On...Anon 1:23 re: 1975<BR/><BR/>I wrote for 1975 around 1967. On radio GTA's spin on the title was that it was a satire on an article that predicted we'd be living like <I>The Jetsons</I> in 1975. He implied the date should be treated as one would George Orwell's <I>1984</I>.<BR/><BR/>The booklet was published in 1956; I'm not sure when 1972 was pegged as the end date. The earliest reference I remember was in Dr Hoeh's <I>History of the True Church</I>, published in 1959, but there were earlier claims on the date.<BR/><BR/>Years later, GTA admitted that by the late 1960s he started to distance himself from <I>1972</I> and <I>Petra.</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-5703037918764810272009-02-13T13:23:00.000+13:002009-02-13T13:23:00.000+13:00"1975 in Prophecy," as I remember, was the title o..."1975 in Prophecy," as I remember, was the title of a movie HWA saw, and thought the title was catchy enough to give a real hook to his booklet. It was not intended to set dates.<BR/><BR/>Another such move followed his staying at the Ambassador Hotel in New York City. He thought its name had a classy ring to it. Voila! Ambassador College -- a name from which countless speeches took inspiration, emphasizing the role of AC students as ambassadors for Christ. All because HWA liked the name of a certain NYC hotel.<BR/><BR/>A booklet title and the name of a college, both borrowed from other entities for their catchy "ring," and raised thereafter, by all sorts of seers, to prophetic significance.<BR/><BR/>I remember people hanging around the Pasadena Hall of Administration until midnight, December 31, 1972, a date conjured retroactively from the booklet title. They wanted to be on the spot for a call to start packing for Petra. But HWA had gotten the title from a movie, and so far as I knew, was home asleep.<BR/><BR/>When the church didn't fly to Petra in 72 and Jesus didn't appear in 75, one might have asked why so much emphasis was placed on those dates, given their arbitrary source. I've never heard an answer to that question.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-16081755473920486162009-02-13T12:16:00.000+13:002009-02-13T12:16:00.000+13:00If Ron were really smart he would spin it as his p...If Ron were really smart he would spin it as his prophecies are not about the end of the world, just about the end of the banking and financial world as we know it. Of course he probably already asked for everyone's savings and 401(k)'s, so maybe no one in his church realized that the rest of us have lost all those things.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13228531006955465637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-47371767288344172852009-02-13T11:29:00.000+13:002009-02-13T11:29:00.000+13:00Dave Pack's way to repackage the same old, same ol...Dave Pack's way to repackage the <I>same old, same old</I>:<BR/><BR/><I>"I've never given a sermon quite like this before..."</I> - How? Standing on your head?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-57648069555518046912009-02-13T10:10:00.000+13:002009-02-13T10:10:00.000+13:00"Jerusalem syndrome imposed on a previous psychoti...<EM>"Jerusalem syndrome imposed on a previous psychotic illness."</EM><BR/><BR/>I didn't buy it during Round One, and I certainly don't buy it during Round Two. (I definitely won't buy it when he winds up for Round Three.)<BR/><BR/>Ronald Weinland is NOT nuts. Crazy like a fox, maybe, but he absolutely has every single one of his marbles firmly in place.<BR/><BR/>They are only in it for the money.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-56095490421443763692009-02-13T09:01:00.000+13:002009-02-13T09:01:00.000+13:00Dennis said, "In the COG ministry, those most give...Dennis said, "In the COG ministry, those most given to foolish preaching tend to give the longest sermons on the most speculative of topics. Rambling is raised to an art form."<BR/><BR/>MY COMMENT - Dennis, I am not going to mention any names, but did you know "Waterhouse" means "go water the house of God"?<BR/><BR/>RichardAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-60334769146812496612009-02-13T08:43:00.000+13:002009-02-13T08:43:00.000+13:00Ron noted:"“Why go into explaining anything to the...Ron noted:<BR/><BR/>"“Why go into explaining anything to them…they don’t even keep the Sabbath."<BR/><BR/>Sadly and of course, this kind of reasoning also undoes Ron's need to be one of the Two Witnesses to the whole world who also mostly "don't even keep the Sabbath." <BR/><BR/>End of career Ron...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com