The latest issue of The Journal is on its way to subscribers, and its got a finger on the pulse of several significant issues.
For starters there's coverage of the Weinland cult. There is a revealing treasury of Ronnie's written claims, though The Journal - being The Journal and polite to a fault - dignifies the self-proclaimed End Time prophet and Witness with the honorific "Mr. Weinland." (Be assured that Hell will freeze over before this practice is adopted here.) The title "Strong Thunder" is borrowed from this article.
The Big Sandy situation gets an airing. Dave Havir wishes peace on all, while John Warren has nothing to share but his disappointment. As Dr. Smith repeatedly said on the 60's TV show Lost In Space: "The pain... oh the pain!"
There's extensive coverage of the Mokarow/Carrozzo conflab recently held in Dallas. There were 19 speakers with a daily attendance of around 35, which you'd have to say is a somewhat modest achievement. Among those turning up for the occasion were such notables as Anthony Buzzard and David Sielaff.
There's coverage of the latest palpitations on the UCG's council, with several pairs of knickers apparently tightly knotted over the issue of "bloc voting".
Reg Killingley has a column on promoting peace, a relevant topic given Reg attends the Big Sandy church. Dave Havir tackles the issue of Apostolic succession (which indicates, I guess, that the Big Sandy brethren aren't about to ordain him Bishop or even provide Dave with a gilded pectoral cross...) Dennis Diehl has some thoughts on the narcissistic New Age fluff in The Secret.
In short, for COG news junkies it's an issue not to miss. Download the front and back pages, or even better, get a subscription and help ensure that Dixon can keep this much needed resource going. (Note to the webmaster - it's not easy to shuffle through all that detritus on the main page to actually find subscription details...)
104 comments:
Well, it was well known that Wieland's predictions would fail to be fulfilled, so no surprised there. The surprise is, that The Journal would waste news print covering the fantasies of a religious charlatan.
I once challenged Makarow about the repudiation of his former beliefs, and like most people here, he was unable to come up with any sensible answers!
Anthony Buzzard fancies himself as an intellectual, as well as an expert in biblical, textual analysis. But when I challenged his silly assertion that Jesus was not God, by citing the following: "God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory," he replied that the text was "spurious." What nonsense!
>>>Dennis Diehl has some thoughts on the narcissistic New Age fluff in The Secret.<<<
I note that you didn't describe the kind of thoughts that Dennis has. Are they insightful, profound or are they the same kind of thoughts he often have the "courage" to publish here?
Finally, your call to subscribe to The Journal would be welcomed if Dixon adopted an objective and impartial editorial policy, instead of trying to be all things to all men.
Tom:
Weinland not Wieland
Mokarow not Makarow
The Journal's exposure of Ronnie's ravings is a good thing in my view.
An impartial and objective editorial policy is exactly what Dixon has adopted - and he does a pretty good job of it.
The article, A Bigger Secret Than the Secret, in the Journal, is a validation of "A man's life consists not in the abundance of things that he possesses."
Perhaps Thomas, you could submit an article on the topic of your choice for the public to consider?
...with the honorific "Mr. Weinland." (Be assured that Hell will freeze over before this practice is adopted here.)
Remember, hell (or hades in the NT Greek) is just a hole in the ground. Depending on where on earth the hole is, it could freeze over.
Don't call a greedy, lying false prophet like Ronald Weinland Mister (meaning master) no matter what happens in hell.
DennisDiehl said...
>>>Perhaps Thomas, you could submit an article on the topic of your choice for the public to consider?<<<
To whom should I submit it? Will Dixon be willing to publish my comments on the rantings in cog-land? I doubt it.
BTW, when it comes to criticism of your opinions, methinks that you are very or even over sensitive. There may be understandable reason for your sensitivity, but displaying it so publicly suggests a form of self-pity.
It addition, you strike me as the type of person who bides his time to get revenge. Hence your desire for me to post a photo of me. By me posting a photo, it would give you the opportunity to get your revenge. Because I joking said that, "the smirk on your face suggests that you were only there for the beer."
Well, Francis Bacon describes revenge as "wild justice." Now wild justice will only harm you, as I am impervious to anything you might say, not to mention that my angel always behold the face of my father, who is heaven. And I would hate you to fall into his hands.
So, please strive to overcome your sensitivity, by dealing with criticism, whether fair or unfair, with the maturity that your experiences should have conferred upon you.
Bahhhhhh! Check out Rotten Ron's mug shot! He looks nothing like the back cover of his book anymore!
The Journal would be happy to consider publishing an opinion piece from Tom. We need the article itself. Short is good. Shorter is better. We also need a photo we can crop down to a mug shot. And we need a biographical blurb to run as an editor's note to precede the byline. No guarantees, of course. But we'd be happy to read and consider printing whatever Tom might write for us. --Dixon Cartwright
Tom, if Dixon doesn't want to publish your article or if you feel his restrictions as to length are not reasonable, then the World Wide Web is available.
You already have a Google account, which gives you the option to set up your own blog on blogspot. If you can operate a word processor, you can operate the Google web publishing tools.
I believe that Dixon (whom I've never met) is providing a valuable service, in that he is assisting in transforming the Armstrong movement away from all of the toxic cultic ideas and practices of the past.
We've seen evidence that many of the ACOGs are "mainstreaming", so to speak (if that is indeed even possible). Better and more complete information, such as that provided in the Journal, is the best way to accomplish this.
BB
ekimks said: "Tom, if Dixon doesn't want to publish your article or if you feel his restrictions as to length are not reasonable, then the World Wide Web is available."
Tom already has a website of his own. I have read a few of his items just out of curiosity.
I won't offer an opinion of them here. Check them out and see for yourself.
Tom, Can you provide the url again?
--> Charlie Kieran
"The Journal" has always been a mystery to me. Who reads it? I think maybe ex-Armstrongists. Most Armstrongist organizations would probably forbid their people to read it because it would expose them to other viewpoints.
Armstrongism has always been a movement that relied on the manipulation of information. So I can hardly imagine the leadership of various splinter groups condoning the reading of The Journal.
-- Neo
A look in my 2005 almanac shows German armed forces at 296,000. That's air, ground and sea. They have 376 aircraft,12 large navy ships, 12 submarines, 2,398 tanks.
In less than 3 weeks they will cart away 96 million of us to concentration camps in Germany. Thats just the USA, when you add in Canada, Australia. New Zealand, Finland Norway England Sweden Iceland France and a bunch of smaller countries I'm figuring about 30,000 troops per nation. 10,000 Germans vs 30 million Redneck snipers of the Appalachian mountains. the other 20,000 other German soldiers mopping up the other parts of the USA.
Now does Weinland go to do his 2 witness thing in Jerusalem starting April 17th?
Is he teaching that the Germans do this like Armstrong did?
Will the fire that comes out of Weinlands mouth only harm those just right in front of him? Or can it get you from far away?
Really now this shows that he needs help. We should not be rotten Ronning him.Instead pray for him.
Of all the things he's ever lost, he'll miss his mind the most.
"None of the Book of Revelation was written so that just anyone reading it could understand. It has to be revealed through God's servants, and most of it was reserved to be revealed at this end-time through God's end-time prophet--me."
"God will even tell these things in advance. How will He do this? He will do it through His end-time prophets--His two witnesses, but He will do it primarily through me, His end-time spokesman."
"This phase of the Fifth Thunder is one of my own choosing, which God has granted me as part of His own will and purpose for the Church (this will be clarified more fully in the Sixth Thunder).
Petition to God
(So Ron get's to tell God how he wants it all to play out.)
"I have also made a petition to the ETERNAL God of Abraham. My petition is that this first phase of the Fifth Thunder be fulfilled exactly as it is written here.
"This request is so that scattered brethren who are asleep might be awakened and know that God has granted them the opportunity to repent and return to Him at this time. Also, it is so that they may know that I am His end-time prophet, His spokesman for the two end-time witnesses."
"To make it absolutely clear, my petition covers more in regard to the scattered ministers. The most notable among them will be those who die toward the beginning.
"However, every minister who was scattered, who fails to repent early on and return to God (with me, as God's minister, teaching them) will die during the final three and one-half years of great tribulation. They will not be in the first resurrection, and they will not see the millennial reign of God's Kingdom on earth.
"The most notable deaths early on, which are yet to come to pass, will be the two remaining television presenters in the Living Church of God.
"The sound of this thunder will be intensified by the early deaths of the leaders of the Philadelphia Church of God, the Restored Church of God and the Church of the Great God.
"As John's counterpart, God has given me the understanding of the revelations given to John. In addition, I am the spokesman, one of the very end-time prophets and witnesses that John wrote about."
A PhD in God-Haunted Narcississm for someone.
Sorry, can't leave the good quotes off the list.
"These thunders are largely a matter of my own choosing, which God has given to me since I am His spokesman and the one who will stand before Him to the whole world during this end-time."
You want good quotes Dennis? Stop by the blog sometime, you'll get good quotes in spades.
To answer the question about the Witnessing Weinlands and Jerusalem, that was covered on Saturday. To wit:
50:00-51:01, RW March 29 sermon "Three More Weeks":
"Also a part of something that I believe God has given to me to do is that I’ll begin my job as one of the two witnesses while in Jerusalem. Both witnesses will be in Jerusalem April the 17th. Laura and I are going to Israel. The Harrells are coming with us. That’ll cause some things out here. [unclear] [laughter] I can hear it now. Whoo! [he snickers] They got a 50-50 chance. Well. Four out of three.[?] Maybe there’s someone we’re going to meet up with! Some of you critics out there. I’m talking to you people listening in. Not any of you listening in in the congregation. [he snickers] Who could it be? Well that’ll be announced at that time. So just keep listening. We’ll tell you. So the second witness will be with me in Jerusalem and I will announce who it is on the weekly Sabbath of the 19th."
1:16:24:
"What if, what if…comes April 17, my life changes dramatically one way or the other because it’s all in. Are we holding back? Are we all running, yet? So what are you going to do some of you who are skeptics and critics and you see these things come to pass? I will tell you what you will do as a whole, you will lie, you will twist, you will distort and you will die – speedily. So, one of us is walking on very dangerous ground."
1:53:20:
"If by Pentecost I’m just going to make this real clear to everyone. If by Pentecost it is not powerfully and abundantly clear that there has been a great deal of destruction that will clearly encompass a third of all plant life in the US and at least the clear results of this mingled with blood the death of very much animal life and the beginning of large numbers of human life then I will stop preaching. Just so all the critics and everyone out there will understand. I am true to my word in these things. OK? And for all the critics if by the end of July and for most likely around Pentecost if nothing has clearly caused great destruction and death I will make it very clear that I was a false prophet. I will do exactly what I said I would do on aaaaall those interviews that I have held. To do less. Well. Would be quite insane."
You know, that second-last quote really bothered me when it finally sunk in, which is why I took out life insurance when I found out the elders will be given leadership positions in their respective congregations this coming Saturday.
Then I saw Rotten Ronnie's mug shot in The Journal, and I wasn't so worried anymore.
WW, that's amazing stuff. If he is in Jerusalem, and starts the typical Jerusalem Syndrome behaviors, they will wisk him away to a hospital for tourists who get overcome by Jerusalem and the Bible and then deported.
Just so long as his bastard elders don't start knocking on MY door in the interim, trying desperately to make their prophet's "prediction" with regards to his "critics" come true, Dennis.........
Funny how when someone makes such nonsense prophecies of death at their behest, we all start checking our coughs and drive much more carefully so we don't give them any ammo..ha.
What if the Jerusalem Syndrome Police were waiting for him at the airport? End of mission!
"Introduction to How Jerusalem Syndrome Works
You're on a guided tour of Jerusalem, and your friend begins acting strangely. At first you think he's just jet-lagged and tired, but once he's wandering around in bed sheets and proclaiming himself John the Baptist, you know something's really wrong. Your friend has Jerusalem Syndrome.
According to Dr. Yair Bar-El, these are the symptoms of Jerusalem Syndrome:
anxiety
the urge to leave the group and go about Jerusalem by himself or herself
an obsession with cleansing -- baths, showers, grooming
donning a white gown made of a bed sheet
singing or shouting verses from the Bible or religious songs
marching to a holy place
delivering a sermon in said holy place, urging people to a better life [source: Bar-El et al.]
Tour guides in Jerusalem watch for these first two symptoms: Agitated, tense people who fall behind the group and want to go off alone should be observed carefully. Once they get to the bed sheet stage, there's no hope.
People with the syndrome proper generally aren't ranting and raving like mad people. They're anxious and even worried -- "What if I'm the Messiah?" "What if I am pregnant with the Messiah?" "What will I do?" They're polite. They describe their experience as being disorienting and somewhat like being intoxicated. They don't hallucinate. They know who they are ("I know I'm Joe Smith, but what if Joe Smith is the Messiah?"). They remember the details of their experience and are ashamed and reluctant to discuss them. They say that they felt something opening up within them [source: Bar-El].
When people exhibit signs of Jerusalem Syndrome, authorities know to bring them to Kfar Shaul, a psychiatric hospital. Doctors don't tell "King David" that he isn't King David -- it doesn't help to invalidate the patient's notion of himself and his mission. Doctors sometimes give patients mild antipsychotic medications or tranquilizers.
The best way to help, say the doctors at Kfar Shaul, is to get the patients out of the city and to their families. Once the people are out of Jerusalem and around their families and people who know them, they return to normal. They walk right back into their lives, and not a trace of mental illness seems to follow them. The whole process of Jerusalem Syndrome, from start to finish, takes from five to seven days. It's as if it never happened.
Many people who get Jerusalem Syndrome don't get treated at all. In a year, maybe 100 strangely behaving tourists are referred to Kfar Shaul, but only 40 or so are deemed in need of admission."
http://health.howstuffworks.com/jerusalem-syndrome.htm/printable
The only problem with that is, the group travelling with Weinland, including the little woman, may all have "Jerusalem syndrome" too.
Barring that, they're all long-time members of the church, Dennis; they'll be able to hide their "true" faces from anyone who would even so much as look at them funny. :-(
As for watching my coughs, I don't intend to do that; I'm going to keep right on going with Weinland Watch. If the elders want to come after me now (if they can even find me in the first place), at least there's a public record that I've got their number.
Like I said, it's life insurance.......barring the highly unlikely "act of god", I'll probably never need to use it......but it certainly can't hurt.
Tom said, "Well, it was well known that Wieland's predictions would fail to be fulfilled, so no surprised there. The surprise is, that The Journal would waste news print covering the fantasies of a religious charlatan".
MY COMMENT - Tom, it wasn't self evident back in the 1950s and 1960s that HWAs many predictions (i.e. time is short, 1975 in Prophecy, etc.) would fail to be fulfilled. No surprise there with HWAs failed predictions either.
Perhaps the Journal is helping to stop history from repeating itself since there wasn't a free COG press in the 1950s and 1960s covering the fantasies of a religious charlatan named Herbert W. Armstrong.
Richard
Anyone taking bets? Which comes first - Tom's article or Tom's picture on the internet?
Richard
Gavin said, "As Dr. Smith repeatedly said on the 60's TV show Lost In Space: "The pain... oh the pain!"
MY COMMENT - I suspect the age demographics of AW website would appreciate that great 1960s sci-fi adventure Lost in Space. I think it came on right after the Beverly Hillbillies.
Who knows? Perhaps Dr. Smith was referring to Armstrongism, The Plain Truth about Child Rearing, or RCG/WCG tithing - "The pain...oh the pain!"
Tom Mahon, Sir Anthony Buzzard is a fine fellow. I doubt that he "fancies himself" anything at this point in his life. He must be close to 70 by now, well past youthful flights of fancy. And he knew Mr. Armstrong quite well, thank you.
He comes from good English stock. His title is hereditary, bequeathed to him by his father who was physician to the Queen. If I remember correctly, he is an Oxford grad; at any rate he came to AC from Oxford. He is certainly an intellectual, given to research and the normal work of a college professor.
If Sir Anthony says a text is spurious, it might behoove you, and me for that matter, to research the materials that have led him to that conclusion. He is neither irresponsible nor alone in his opinion. The men who have done the research, not in translation but in the earliest available texts, are serious scholars, including Sir Anthony.
If you think Herbert Armstrong's public opinions take precedence over scholarship, believe me, he knew plenty that he didn't divulge to his church. He was extremely open in private, even about the most intimate things as well as matters of doctrine and church administration.
I remember well the words of one student's father who happened to hear Mr. Armstrong speak in the Ambassador Auditorium one afternoon. He wasn't a church member, and after the sermon he told his son, "Herbert Armstrong is a man of God, but he ain't got no man between him and God."
Anthony Buzzard should be esteemed for allowing himself his own thoughts. When HWA is allowed to get in the way, then everything he said in error becomes part of that person's lifestyle, dogma stifles spiritual and intellectual growth, and personal responsibility is thwarted in favor of loyalty to error.
HWA allowed no such authority over his own life, which in my opinion is a part of his life worth emulating. Still, "Everyone to his fancy," said the old woman as she kissed the cow. Perhaps it was a sacred cow.
DC said...
>>>The Journal would be happy to consider publishing an opinion piece from Tom.<<<
Only to consider? Does this mean that you will have to vet it first to see if it conforms to The Journal's editorial policy of not upsetting anyone?
Anyway, I will submit an article for your consideration, and it will not be an "opinion piece." Opinions are the ignorance we express when we don't know the truth! Those who know the truth, don't need opinions, you might be surprised to learn!
Richard said:
>>>MY COMMENT - Tom, it wasn't self evident back in the 1950s and 1960s that HWAs many predictions (i.e. time is short, 1975 in Prophecy, etc.) would fail to be fulfilled. No surprise there with HWAs failed predictions either.<<<
Mr. Armstrong never made any predictions, that I am aware of, I hasten to add! He sought to explain a number of end time prophecies, but made the mistake of dating some of them. However, those prophecies are being fulfilled as we speak.
Also, there is a great deal of difference between predicting and prophesying. A prediction may or may not come to pass, but a prophecy is certain to be fulfilled because it come from God, who is the only one that can foretell the future.
Sadly, since you were never baptised, it is impossible for you to fully understand the teaching of the bible. For only those who have received the spirit of God, are able to understand the things of God.
BTW, when are we going to see a photo of you, so that we can deduce what a fine, upstanding young man you are?
Tom said, "Opinions are the ignorance we express when we don't know the truth!"
MY COMMENT - Oh, really?
Well according to your logic, Tom, when I heard your God idol HWA tell us "time is short" and he prints a booklet entitled "1975 in Prophecy" and makes repeated end time predictions that NEVER came true, were these only HWA's opinions when he presented himself as God's representative on earth in the one and only true church? Are you saying your God idol HWA was ignorant and didn't know the truth?
So Tom, when a Public Accounting firm issues its opinion on the financial statements of a company it has audited, are you saying the Public Accounting firm is ignorant of the true condition of the financial affairs of the firm when it issues its accounting opinion?
Richard
Tom said,
"Mr. Armstrong never made any predictions, that I am aware of, I hasten to add!"
"BTW, when are we going to see a photo of you, so that we can deduce what a fine, upstanding young man you are?"
MY COMMENT - Tom, unless you are being sarcastic (and I suspect you are), I am not a young man. My family was steeped in Armstrongism dating back to the early 1950s with my grandfather. I know what I heard from Mr. Armstrong, I know what he wrote, and I know what he preached. I am a first hand witness over many years. Mr. Armstrong made MANY predictions too numerous to list in this short blog response. He made all his false predictions "In Christ's name". When he wrote co-worker letters (some of which I still have), he usually used his false predictions of world events as a marketing opportunity to raise money.
Now, according to you Tom, predictions are opinions ( since you stae they may not come to pass), and opinions are made when one is ignorant of the truth. So, HWAs false predictions were his own opinions (even though he signed most of his written work, "in Christ's name") and therefore HWA was ignorant of the truth according to your logic. Thank you Tom Mahon for confirming what many of us know is the truth about the fraud Herbert W. Armstrong. He came in Christ's name, and he deceived many people.
I don't feel any obligation to publish a picture of myself since I am not the one going around casting self righteous public judgment on an old picture of Dennis Diehl. I believe you used the word "mop" referring to his hair. I thought Dennis looked fine in the picture and your criticism of Dennis's appearance I thought was rather bizarre. But, that's only me.
Richard
Tom>>>"I am impervious to anything you might say"<<<
LP>>>Excellent. Then you will not be offended by me calling you an Idiot.<<<
Tom>>>"Not at all"<<<
Well Tom, its nice to know you are aware of your mental limitations.
An piece to chew on:
Could the moron be "MISTER" Pack in Itiots clothing???
Tom,
Which end-time prophecies do you erroneously think are being fulfilled as we speak?
I heard that drivel the entire time I was in the WCG and others heard it for years and years before me. When we are having this conversation ten years from now I predict the prophecies you say are being fulffilled now, you will again say are being fullfilled in ten years and offer no excuse or apology for being wrong earlier.
Please elaborate on which prophecies you speak of now so I can have a checkpoint for later.
Hi All!
Is Tom really Mr. Pack?
I don’t think so.
Having read nearly everything Pack has written, it is my opinion that he owns a word processing system and is quite adept at using both spelling and syntax check programs. Tom is not. Moreover, Pack is very concerned with how he comes off in print, whereas Tom lives in a universe of his own voice. Most telling, Pack is the master of the run on sentence, unable to stick to a single subject, sometimes within the course of a sole statement, while our pal Tom is pretty much to the point. Some things are about style and some are about thought process. It’s hard to fake.
"The most notable deaths early on, which are yet to come to pass, will be the two remaining television presenters in the Living Church of God.
"The sound of this thunder will be intensified by the early deaths of the leaders of the Philadelphia Church of God, the Restored Church of God and the Church of the Great God.”
Is it just me, or are these predictions a tad claustrophobic? (Not to mention mean.) In what universe would the deaths of any of these people be considered noteworthy? Most of them would be lucky to snag an obit in their local paper and maybe the Journal.
I suppose them all dropping off would be a bit shocking, so at least we know what signs to look for. As for Germans invading the US, I would like to report that I have spotted a German submarine in the vicinity of Lake Michigan, near the Chicago shoreline. (U505). I hope this helps!
Mark Lax
I do not think we need the use of such discourteous terms as "moron" and "idiot" here.
That kind of ad homoneim invective is not necessary for meaningful debate.
-- Neo
PS:
"The most notable deaths early on, which are yet to come to pass, will be the two remaining television presenters in the Living Church of God.
"The sound of this thunder will be intensified by the early deaths of the leaders of the Philadelphia Church of God, the Restored Church of God and the Church of the Great God.”
Is it just me, or does this seem like a veiled call to arms? I am reminded of Louis Farrakhan’s statements before the death of Malcolm X.
Mark Lax
"The most notable deaths early on, which are yet to come to pass, will be the two remaining television presenters in the Living Church of God."
How can you tell ? Is Anthony Buzzard circling around ?
"The most notable deaths early on, which are yet to come to pass, will be the two remaining television presenters in the Living Church of God."
Don't forget Raymond McNair of the 21st Century GOG, they haven't been able to have a FOT since 2005 due to his health. Members - the few that there are - must hitch a ride with the equally moronic UCG !
Is Tony Buzzard circling the 21COG ?
Anonymous said...
>>>Sir Anthony Buzzard is a fine fellow.<<<
It all depends upon your definition "fine."
>>>He comes from good English stock. His title is hereditary, bequeathed to him by his father who was physician to the Queen.<<<
Does this mean that he can't get anything wrong, and is therefore above criticism?
>>>If I remember correctly, he is an Oxford grad; at any rate he came to AC from Oxford.<<<
Peter and his brother were fishermen, and they came to Jesus from a ship on the sea of Galilee.
>>>He is certainly an intellectual, given to research and the normal work of a college professor.<<<
If you mean that an intellectual is one who is familiar with obscure terms, and uses turgid language to try and impress his readers, then, I agree that Anthony is an intellectual.
>>>If Sir Anthony says a text is spurious, it might behoove you, and me for that matter, to research the materials that have led him to that conclusion.<<<
I am not sure who you are, and why you believe you may learn something from Anthony, but if the rubbish on his wed site is a reflection of his understanding of the doctrines of the bible, he has nothing to teach me.
>>>If you think Herbert Armstrong's public opinions take precedence over scholarship, believe me, he knew plenty that he didn't divulge to his church.<<<
HWA's public opinions were no different from the private opinions of scholars. There were and are just opinions!
>>>He(HWA)was extremely open in private, even about the most intimate things..<<
In that case, you should be able to confirm, for the benefit of those who only speculate, if he confided in you that he was guilty of incest or adultery, as many here believe?
'I do not think we need the use of such discourteous terms as "moron" and "idiot" here.'
Cannot one express a truthful opinion in blunt terms?? No vulgarity or slander, just truthful opinion?
Tom (The Idiot) has expressed his moronic opinion on many ocasions, even accusing Gavin of evil designs, and ulterior motives.
Why should he be given his opinion and I not mine?
"If you mean that an intellectual is one who is familiar with obscure terms, and uses turgid language to try and impress his readers..."
Tom, what does "turgid" mean? Sounds very impressive.
Paul
"That kind of ad homoneim invective is not necessary for meaningful debate."
In my opinion, this is an excellent example of someone being "turgid".
"If you mean that an intellectual is one who is familiar with obscure terms, and uses turgid language to try and impress his readers..."
Tom, what does "turgid" mean? Sounds very impressive.
Paul
Absolutley Hilarious Karma Fairy!
Weinland is about the preservation of Armstrongist elitism and privilege. That is really why the leaders of the various splinter groups are doing what they are doing.
They want the prestige, the car, the $800 suit and the adoring looks of their followers. They want to be HWA clones. This is not about servant leadership, it is about self-serving leadership. All these men are connected together by this theme.
In Weinland's case, he played with this fire, began to believe in himself and got burnt. The process was similar, I believe for HWA. He eventually began to believe in himself. And that is when absolute imperiousness took over.
So we are seeing in Weinland's church this system, the same one that is in the UCG and the LWCG and all the others, in a form of ultimate decay.
-- Neo
In my gut I feel that most COGlet splinter leaders are sincere in their own minds. It's just hard to imagine having a mind like that.
I can't fathom a Gerald Flurry, Dave Pack or Ron Weinland, but who would go to such trouble lunacy for a car and an expensive suit?
Spiritual quirkiness, excusivism, unchecked ego, mind virus and mental illness seem more the causes of such severe personalities to me.
The top dogs of their own Kingdoms of God now are not much different than when I knew them as a young man. They spent years stirring up congregations, screwing them over, getting bad reputations for being dictators, out of touch, nuts and annoying and then either got promoted or just moved to another place to do it all over again.
I can't tell you how much time I spent on the phone over years with people begging for some relief from Dave Pack or others.
All that ever happened was they got moved and the next fellow got to pick up the pieces if he was any kind of genuine human being.
PS One major lifelong fault, among many of course, with WCG and all it's administrations was the inability or unwillingness to address the repeat offenders in the ministry. Joe Jr. said "no" when I said ministers needed to know their temperment type and there were tests to see if a guy was even suited for such people oriented responsibilities.
He just said "no" And there in always lay the problem with round pegs in square holes.
If God called some I knew into the ministry, He was drunk that day.
Tom said, "Opinions are the ignorance we express when we don't know the truth!"
Later Tom said, " HWA's public opinions were no different from the private opinions of scholars. There were and are just opinions!"
CONCLUSION: Therefore, Tom Mahon agrees that Herbert W. Armstrong expressed opinions because Tom believes HWA was ignorant, and the truth was not with HWA. Thank you Tom for demonstrating both your mental aptitude and your agreement that HWA did not have the truth!
Folks, please hold your applauses - boxing Tom into a corner using Tom's own logic and words was like stealing candy from a baby Tom Mahon, figuratively speaking of course. It wasn't that hard at all.
Richard
Dennis wrote: "I can't fathom a Gerald Flurry, Dave Pack or Ron Weinland, but who would go to such trouble lunacy for a car and an expensive suit?"
I think many would. The only one who faces a big downside is R. Weinland. And I think it is a matter of his having gone too far. My guess is that Weinland did not intend this to turn out this way, but now it is too late to pull the brake lever.
The interesting thing is that other Armstrongists will make fun of Weinland. But they are no different than he is. They have just committed to a different timetable.
I do believe that somebody needed to do something to weed out bad Armstrongist ministers. Though this is an issue that is no longer relevant to me, I have encountered men in the ministry who cannot answer a question from a lay member without getting very angry. I knew a minister like that in the Tulsa, Oklahoma church in the early Eighties. My thought was that he would not last long. But, instead, he is now full time minister in the WCG. He had a real anger management problem (something that Armstrongists would term "leadership). I feel sorry for the people in his congregation.
-- Neo
Neo, I agree for the most part. Most leave themselves an out or "options" to deny this or that pronouncement. Let's face it, the Second Coming is the eternal carrot of keep on keeping on.
Weinland has backed himself into a corner. He says he's out of it if he is wrong. We'll see. He's going to Jerusalem for Passover and announcing the Second Witness. It doesn't get much more committed than that.
If he is not careful, the Israeli government will round him up or turn him right back around on the plane. I happen to know they know he's on the way.
I"m thinking Ron will launch his career at Passover in Jerusalem by overturning a Falafel, hummus and tahini vendor cart. After that, trust me, it will all be downhill
:)
Dennis Diehl said, "He just said "no" And there in always lay the problem with round pegs in square holes.
If God called some I knew into the ministry, He was drunk that day".
MY COMMENT - Well of course Tkach Jr. said "no". The test probably would have shown that half to three quarters of the "elite Ambassador College trained ministry" didn't belong in the ministry at all. In fact Dennis, the test probably would have shown that you were the minority of the ministry WHO PROBABLY DID BELONG in the ministry.
I will make this personal observation with no disrespect to you Dennis. My father was converted into WCG late in life while in his late 50s. The ministers he respected were not the young, fresh out of Ambassador College with no real life experience ministry. Rather, the ministers he respected were the seasoned ones near his own same age - ministers such as Vince Panella here in Baltimore/Washington and Keith Thomas in Iowa - both of whom entered the fulltime WCG ministry after careers in other walks of life. In other words, they were seasoned with real life experience, i.e. discussing in sermons real life situations like raising children and working jobs wasn't just an academic "theoretical" exercise to them.
Your point about round pegs in square holes is well taken. People like Meredith, Pack and others I could name who came up through the fraudulent WCG system attending Ambassador College never had to go out into the real world and earn a real living. Instead, they graduated thinking they were special and entitled. The peoples' tithes were their entitlement.
I thank God often that I am an Ambassador College reject (seriously, I applied to AC and was rejected). I went on to get my undergraduate degree in Finance, and earn a MBA from accredited "worldly" Universities.
Again, no disrespect to you. I have read a lot of what you have written, and you were probably the square peg that would have fit in any other hole - except the WCG round hole!
Richard
Hi Richard.
Oh you can disrespect me all you want..ha.
I worked for Keith Thomas in Minn. and was the first place I was sent after college. I agree in part, but some of the older types came out of WW11 and were pretty set in their ways too. Some brought the military with them into their jobs and ministry. Of course this would be true of many careers begun shortly after that time.
My ENFP Extrovert Intuitive, Perceptive and Feeling Meyers Briggs profile, that is the hard wiring of our nature says people like me become ministers, priests, counselors, social workers and massage therapists. It really says that!
I am a caretaker by nature and we wear a sign on our heads that says "wipe feet here." Or so they say :)
As I have said in the past, I did not grow up in WCG. Was accepted to a Methodist seminary already but my heart at the time was with WCG. I was 18! Weird kid.
I believe I personally would have had my midlife questions about things that I question no matter the denomination. Only the circumstances, people and events would have been different, with the same outcome for me.
Richard: You are assuming square pegs in round holes if the WCG were a Christian organization. In fact the people that the WCG selected for the ministry were just the people they needed to maintain their control on the lives of lay members.
The qualifications for an Armstrongists minister are:
1) Imperiousness
2) Condescension
3) Judgementalism
4) Authoritarianism
5) Phariseeism
6) Thanklessness (to all the tithe payers)
7) Complete loyalty to the Armstrongist government.
Most of the ministers I met in the WCG, who were still under the influence of Armstrongism, would be described by the list of attributes above.
I recall David Robinson telling us about sitting on the committee that selected students from Big Sandy to go out into the ministry. He disparaged the idea that they would talk about love and compassion. He wanted to know how they proposed to impose discipline. To him that was the mark of a true minister.
So the WCG was just another hierarchical organization.
-- Neo
Neo, I know that was your experience. I'll just bite my lip on the all inclusive generalities.
I never met a member who did not consider themselves a Christian. Most who came to WCG had grown tired of hearing all sweetness and light and craved the parts their churches left out (prophecy, Book of Revelation, Jewishness of early church and what seemed to be the NT slant on things, along with that nagging sense that holidays were suspect. It takes no genius to see where we get the original Easter/Xmas customs and origins.
The problem is trying to make Paul look like what he said fit the Jewish Christian Church mold. Of course it doesn't. But it didn't to Peter or James either.
In my view, you cannot have the message of the Gospels and think it is related to the Message of Paul. One has to go. They aren't both right.
I personally believe that the false Apostles that the Ephesian Church in Revelation was praised for routing out by John, were Paul and his promoters. After all, Paul did say "ALL in Asia have turned aside" from him. Ephesus would be in Asia. You'd think Paul might ask why "ALL" found him to be less than insiring or telling the truth. Long story, just my opinion.
When all forsake you in a large area and in all churches, why does the one think the many are wrong and what's the chance the many are wrong about the one?
:)
Dennis wrote: "I know that was your experience. I'll just bite my lip on the all inclusive generalities."
My experience was that AC was very good at turning out yellow pencils, so generalizations are warranted. There were differences in emphasis among the seven attributes I listed but the seven attributes were pretty much always present.
Let me put it another way, in the pre-1995 WCG, I cannot recall a minister ever having a compassionate word for me on any topic. Their principal focus on any problem was to engage in whatever mental gymnastics necessary to blame it on me. Once that goal was achieved, they were done. They had served the ball into my court with the hope that it would not return. In fact, they were angry if it returned.
In the decades I spent submerged in the caustic juices of Armstrongism, this principle always held.
-- Neo
...and I don't doubt your experience one bit. I wish you hadn't had it but I"m sure YOU wish you hadn't more!
My counselor once quipped , when first we met and he was looking over the forms I had filled out before the session, "wow...you got fired by God!"
I sorta laughed but told him I wasn't in the mood. He then said he used to be a pastor. I then said "if you quote one scripture to me, I am out of here." He said, "relax, I got out of it for the same reasons."
He then said, "I'm very sorry for your experience, now what are you going to do about it?" That guy tore me up in all the right ways but twas painful.
The rest is history, or at least unfolding history in the making.
Can you imagine the time we'd all have sitting around a bunch of picnic tables and talking!
Normally I would not do this, but please watch these two videos. They are short and will make you're day. :)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4EBcrUCXZt0
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1rhtWUzdJpI
This one is insigtful:
Jimmy Swaggart will have you rolling on the floor.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=THRSndOOZik&feature=related
Tom Mahon, I'll avoid discussing anyone's personal foibles here, but I will tell you one thing Mr. Armstrong did tell me, which might come as a surprise, particularly to someone who regards apostleship as the highest rank attainable by human beings.
He told me that he knew that the ministerial descriptions enumerated in Ephesians 4 (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers) were not administrative ranks, but that the church had simply chosen to use them that way. And he shrugged his shoulders. Interesting, no?
I'm glad that all here would never watch a video of a cussin' preacher.
Like this one:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5mkcRkFoYbw&feature=related
Hey! Whah choo lookin' at, bee-atch?
This is way off subject, but I was just watching O'Reilly on FOX. And he had the termerity to talking about how "we" are giving freedom to Afghanistan.
These neo-cons always seem to see the U.S. military as an extension of themselves, hence "we", but never sully their hands in combat. O'Reilly is not giving he Afghanis freedom. Just like John Hagee is not protecting Israel.
The work and the combat and the dying is being done by American soldiers, who would rather be home. I am offended at his use of "we". O'Reilly probably does not even know a soldier. He probably does even know anyone who knows a soldier.
Sorry for the rant.
-- Neo
Further, it is kind of like the paramilitary types that inhabited the ranks on the Big Sandy campus.
Always applauding U.S. agression and deprecating peace making efforts (this showed that the pride of our power was broken) yet ideologically were conscientious objectors to war or should have been.
When people get confused, they get confused about everything.
-- Neo
Gavin,
You stated that Ron Weinland will never have the honorific "MR" bestowed upon him in this blog. And fair enough too.
Simple..try splitting "HERRS".
Jorgheinz
I watched some of those youtube videos...which led me to more...and now makes me wonder...
...why the current WCG just does some "gentle" hand waving, and "gentle" swaying, and doesn't go for the gusto like in sweatier evangelical preacher meetings.
What made me wonder was that on youtube what I saw and heard in some vids about the child preacher Marjoe .
He grew up being tortured by his mother who used waterboarding and other techniques to get the little fella to learn his lines and to act to her standards.
He really learned to work a crowd.
Later, he said it was all a fraud, and participated in having a documentary about it.
Using 'bitorrent', it looks like I could download the whole documentary, but as of now, I've just watched a few shorter youtube videos.
I wonder what the WCG's views are on the Pentecostal approach to worship. Are they wishy-washy in having an official (Tkachian) view on it? Have they taken a stance on it?
No doubt the questions have been asked, and more than a few times.
Is there a WCG booklet entitled something like, "Acceptable Body Movement and Mumblings while Praising God", or "Don't Crap Your Pants While You Dance for Jesus"?
Anyway, the videos I watched on Marjoe are #1, here and #2, here, and #3, here.
Then although Benny Hinn would have been a good one as example of the techniques, I finished up with a video of Prophetess Juanita Bynum
... (or is that 'Opinioness Juanita Bynum', Tom?)
Anon said:
>>>He told me that he knew that the ministerial descriptions enumerated in Ephesians 4 (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers) were not administrative ranks,<<<
The bible doesn't say that they are administrative ranks, it listed them as positions, in order of rank. Administration has to do with the governance of church, which was the responsibility of the Apostles.
However, under the principle of "loosing and binding," the positions or roles could be used as administrative ranks.
Richard said:
>>>Folks, please hold your applauses - boxing Tom into a corner using Tom's own logic and words was like stealing candy from a baby Tom Mahon, figuratively speaking of course. It wasn't that hard at all.<<<
Methinks your declaration of victory is rather premature; for you have palpably failed to grasp the difference between opinion and fact!
Tom
SIR Anthony Buzzard to you, please.
Has anyone seen Tom's picture on the internet yet?
Tom said:
"Methinks your declaration of victory is rather premature; for you have palpably failed to grasp the difference between opinion and fact!"
That's just your palpable opinion...
Oh, come now. Since when has Douglas ever really tried to hide behind his pseudonyms?
He's had dozens. Many of the names he and Dennis came up with on xCG were one-shots intended to accompany some hilarious satire. And contrary to what Tom Mahon seems to think, they were using them long before Tom came along.
And anyone who knew Douglas' style recognized him immediately.
For what it's worth, Douglas is not above taking his own medicine. Not so long ago, someone here complained that his posts were getting too acidic. You know what Douglas did? He looked at the posts in question, seemed to see the complainant's point, and deleted his most recent posts. Then he withdrew from the battle for awhile, until he felt ready to post again.
Perhaps I misinterpret, but that seems to indicate he is at least capable of introspection.
Libro
Tom said:
"Methinks your declaration of victory is rather premature; for you have palpably failed to grasp the difference between opinion and fact!"
I prefer to patently fail at times, but sometimes I suppose we palbably fail too. I guess it's sin-tax.
"patently - unmistakably (`plain' is often used informally for `plainly'); "the answer is obviously wrong"; "You are plainly wrong"; "he is plain stubborn"
"Perhaps I misinterpret, but that seems to indicate he is at least capable of introspection.
Libro"
Yes, introspection is not a strong point with some few here. The exospection, however, is perfect and done exactly how one might expect "me only" religious expression to function.
Ok, I meant "me only and God."
What not to expect from exospecters:
"I was wrong."
"I understand."
"I didn't say that well."
"I guess I am being a butthead."
"I realize I don't know everything."
"That's and interesting point."
"I never thought of that."
"Thank you, that really helped me."
"I apologize, that was rude."
well...you get the point.
"And he had the termerity to talking about how "we" are giving freedom to Afghanistan."
Yep. We just love freedom so much we love to "give" it to other people. Like Iran in the 1950's, and Vietnam in the 1960's.
I wonder, if we love giving freedom so much, why not loose the bonds of other peoples, such as the North Koreans, or the Chinese, or many African nations??
The Apostle Paul
Neotherm said...
"Further, it is kind of like the paramilitary types that inhabited the ranks on the Big Sandy campus.
Always applauding U.S. agression and deprecating peace making efforts (this showed that the pride of our power was broken) yet ideologically were conscientious objectors to war or should have been."
I seem to have been regulary disagreeing with Neotherm lately - however I 100% agree with this last comment.
Although all in the COGs were meant to be conscientious objectors, any sign of negotiating, or peacemaking by governments was immediately slammed as weakness, and signs of how the country, be it US or UK, had descended down the path of destruction and weakness.
Church members should not fight, but we certainly expected everyone else to do so, on our behalf. If not, it just showed how far prophecy was moving along the line!
Questeruk.
Well if "we" don't gets the world to fight then Jesus can't come back. Peace would screw up the whole book of Revelation!
The reason we or they or some, whatever, felt that way was because we were safely tucked into the care of the Church and while a thousand or ten thousand would fall left or right of us, it would not come nigh unto us or ours.
Fat Ass preachers like Hagee have used egofarts like GWB to push for the wars to bring the Savior of all Love. Go figure. Of course, it will just be a sanitation problem cleaning up all the pieces of the little people, and put us back into the stone age.
Den
Libro 66 said...
>>>He's had dozens. Many of the names he and Dennis came up with on xCG were one-shots intended to accompany some hilarious satire. And contrary to what Tom Mahon seems to think, they were using them long before Tom came along.<<<
You are the first admirer to come to his defence. NEXT!
"You are the first admirer to come to his defence. NEXT!"
Tom, you sound like a Faulkner novel:
You de first ad'mirer to his de fence.
I was unaware that Dennis had a fence, but seeing that he does, I'll rush out an buy one, too. Dennis is God.
P.S. Just joshing about your spelling. Mine isn't any better when I get in a hurry.
The Apostle Paul
"Dennis is God"
Hey Apostle Paul! Are you trying to get me eaten by worms...ewwwww.
" And the people gave a shout, saying, 'It is the voice of a god, and not of a man!' And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory; and he was eaten by worms and gave up the ghost."
[Acts of the apostles 12.19b-23]
My ghost is not ready to depart and I'm just a lonely Dutchman!
Tom wrote, "You are the first admirer to come to his defence. NEXT!"
Wow, that reminds me of when the preacher taking phone calls said, "Cut that bitch off. NEXT CALL!" in the horribly expletive-laden YouTube video
You sure you're not that guy?
"The sound of this thunder will be intensified by the early deaths of the leaders of the Philadelphia Church of God, the Restored Church of God and the Church of the Great God.
*****************************
I don't have a problem with that unless Rotten Ronnie has a plan and a gun to "enforce" his delusional views!
Mark Lax said...
I suppose them all dropping off would be a bit shocking, so at least we know what signs to look for. As for Germans invading the US, I would like to report that I have spotted a German submarine in the vicinity of Lake Michigan, near the Chicago shoreline. (U505). I hope this helps!
********************************
I spotted a German sub too, in Portland Oregon! This German sub was captured by the Americans back in WW2. Its at the museum of science and industry! I am going to invest in http://www.meathookus.com/
Come on Germany! Make me rich!!!
The Moron:
"The bible doesn't say that they are administrative ranks, it listed them as positions, in order of rank.
Administration has to do with the governance of church, which was the responsibility of the Apostles."
You are in error once again. They are positions, offices. That part you got right. But where do you get the idea they are "listed in order of rank?"
That statement is nowhere to be found in the bible. You are using your subjective slanted personal bias to deduce that idea.
Administratively, the office of apostle has no higher position that of teacher.
They are positions. Rank is nowhere delineated.
Why are you so fixated on the "Rank of Apostle?"
Are you really MISTER Pack in Idiots clothing???
"I believe you used the word "mop" referring to his hair."
**********************************
Richard, I am afraid that Tom is hopelessly embedded into the "self" as he always comes off as a self righteous prick! Remember what Herpes said: It is the way of get, not give!
Tom wrote about Douglas: This blog was his stage, where he was able to disseminate his poisonous venom against HWA.
******************************
Key word "was." Past tense. Now what does this mean? The blog is now about Tom and his views! It is all about Tom. Just like Herbie, "Its all about me!"
Headline in the Journal:
HWA minion takes over a agnostic/atheist blog! AW closes down for lack of redress!
Or like the film "Despotism." Censor Tom corrects the stupid "going to hell" group of people here and directs (from his superior intellect) the way we should go. That being HWA's way or the lake of fire!
Toms shallow views! How much longer shall we put up with his pompous opinions that are best kept to himself? He should join the list of spammers like Bruce who for years posted Herbal predictions that never panned out. The rank and file group of false prophets. It just never ends. But for the time being, Tom has his audience. We are enabling him to expound his delusions of grandeur. Another Doctor Bob!
Hey Apostle Dave, why didn't any of Jesus apostles refer to themselves or others as "Mister". ie. Mister Paul etc.?
You require your followers to address you as Mister Pack. Could it be there is a serious personality defect here? Why the pompous self righteous egotistical attitude? Where is the self abasing and humble attitude?
It also is my belief that you and Tom are one in the same. You are trying to aggravate those who oppose your erroneous mashinations.
Rhetroical Question:
If HWA was an Apostle (and he wasn't), and the term Apostle is the highest rank one can ever hope to achieve, who confered this rank on him? Who laid hands upon him to confer him to this office and rank? Substitute Pack for HWA. The same applies.
The answer is in each case both HWA and Pack assumed the office/position/rank by themselves. Self appointed apostles.
Goes to show what an overblown erronous opinion of oneself can leed to.
Who ordains the Apostle?
Well I listened to Dave's "And yes brethren, I hold that office..." sermon and that's just how easy it is.
You wear the troops down with a three hour sermon, and then when they get to the point where they don't care if you declare yourelf Pope, just as long as they can go to lunch, you say,
"And yes brethren..I hold that office."
Everyone let's out a big sigh of relief that the sermon is over, they sing a quick "Twas not a foe who deride, for that I could endure," bless the food and hit the door.
It's easy!
Excellent, insightful and oh so true.
You had me laughing on the floor!
Dennis says:
"If he is not careful, the Israeli government will round him up or turn him right back around on the plane. I happen to know they know he's on the way."
Dennis, Dennis, Dennis, please tell me this is true!!
weinlandwatch@gmail.com
Does anyone remember David Hoover AKA David Ben Ariel He has written many pro Armstrong articles and books.
It's sad but last I knew he was very ill.
Anyway the government of Israel deported him. Sending him back to the USA due to his British-Israel, The Beast, Jerusalem the soon coming world HDQ type of writings
So, yes, they can do this to Weinland also.
Tom Mahon -
Man, have you any idea how impossible your reasoning is?
Of Eph. 4:11 you wrote, "The bible doesn't say that they are administrative ranks, it listed them as positions, in order of rank. Administration has to do with the governance of church, which was the responsibility of the Apostles.
"However, under the principle of 'loosing and binding,' the positions or roles could be used as administrative ranks."
Tom, please allow yourself to think on these things. An evangelist isn't in a "position;" he's performing a function. "Evangelist" isn't a rank; it's a function. The same is true of every other function listed. Anyone listed there might find occasion to evangelize, from apostle to teacher. The reverse is also true.
An evangelist is not in a position of rank; the church, quite arbitrarily, chose to use these spiritual functions as formal titles -- but they aren't used that way in Ephesians 4. Proper evangelizing is an inspired function, and NOT a function of "position." That was Mr. Armstrong's point.
The singers in the Jerusalem temple prophesied. Miriam and Devorah prophesied. On other occasions they all taught. When they, or anyone else, from least to greatest, functioned as messengers of God -- or of Godly men -- they exercised apostolic responsibility. Some of their inspired writings are recorded in the Bible. Moses said, "Would God that all the men of Israel would prophesy," when Joshua complained that some in the camp were prophesying. Spiritual gifts are not a function of rank or position.
On at least one famous occasion Stephen evangelized. As a messenger of God on that occasion his function was also apostolic and prophetic. None of these functions was a product of formal "position" or "rank."
At your suggestion I checked Anthony Buzzard's website and found it straightforward, unassuming, intelligent, written with an economy of words. I don't agree with every word, but I know he would thoughtfully consider anything I might write to him. If he were not a thoughtful gentleman, he could not have come to the convictions he posts there.
You seem to respond on the basis of dogma, the source of which I can't imagine. Not even Mr. Armstrong, whom you apparently think you're defending (but you're not), displayed such impervious arrogance. He huffed and puffed, but in the final analysis he listened.
For me, you're an enigma. A closed mind cannot learn or grow. I therefore rest my case.
Go to Google and type in David Ben Ariel. You will find articles covering his deportation from Israel. Weinland falls into the same group of people as Hoover.I'm sure Dennis is right concerning a Weinland deportation by the gov't of Israel.
Another Anonymous wrote:
"Rhetorical Question:
If HWA was an Apostle (and he wasn't), and the term Apostle is the highest rank one can ever hope to achieve, who confered this rank on him? Who laid hands upon him to confer him to this office and rank?"
According to the COG7 book on church history, if memory serves, Herbert Armstrong and 11 other men in that fellowship were ordained as apostles on the same day. I'm no longer sure of the number, but the word "apostle" is definitely the word used.
Dennis wrote: "Perhaps Thomas, you could submit an article on the topic of your choice for the public to consider?"
Dennis, get real. Dixon Cartwright it just as much a slave to the hierarchy as any other Armstrongist. He will publish what you write because you still possess the privileged cachet of the Armstrongist ministry.
Cartwright would never publish anything by Tom or anyone else he perceives to be at the lay member level. Lay member level people did not count in the pre-1995 WCG and they do not oount in The Journal. You count because Cartwright recognizes you as a vetted member of the Black League of Armstrongism.
In the last analysis, The Journal is just another Armstrongist rag where entrenched Armstrongist values can be reflected under the purported heading of journalism.
-- Neo
Re. HWA's apostleship, is it possible that he also had his ordination revoked by the same group that originally ordained him? I think that notion was circulating in the grapevine at one point. Perhaps someone can confirm?
Neo, you're a good bloke with some really perceptive comments, but here I've got to disagree...
Dixon has published a wide range of material from folks who had very little or no profile in the old hierarchies (I count myself among them... a very lowly peon on the bottommost rung.)
Like it or not, there were a few good apples in the barrow, and I think it does little good to turn up the contrast so high that we can't appreciate genuinely decent motives from time to time. Even in the worst days under Armstrong there were good people doing the best they knew under difficult circumstances... and I could easily name some. Where they've ended up in the WCG diaspora depends on a whole lot of personal factors - "there but for the grace of God go I."
Dixon says he'd consider publishing an article by Tom: why call him a liar? The man is far more tolerant than I would be in his position. He also bends over backward to give minority views a fair hearing. Give him a break!
Oh Lord no!
Tom writing an article in the Journal? We'd be treated to 20 column inches of tortured prose on how great he is, and how stupid everyone else is.
After all, that's what his posts here are.
At least there is Dixon to backstop the foolishness and send it to the circular file.
Just Askin'
"The man is far more tolerant than I would be in his position. He also bends over backward to give minority views a fair hearing. Give him a break!"
This is true. You can find articles in the Journal that- well, that get The Journal placed on the sh*t list of all the "major" COG's. While Dixon does cater to Armstrong theology, he allows everything from "Armstrong Lite" to "Armstrong Extra Stout," all from varying sources, nobody-types included.
And while I agree with Neo that Armstrong theology is poison, The Journal exposes many hardliners (at least those who are allowed to read it, or those who like flirting with the danger of reading dissident literature) to alternative ideas that may lead them from Hardcore Armstrong to Softcore Armstrong. And that's a good thing.
The Apostle Paul
Dennis Diehl says, "My ENFP Extrovert Intuitive, Perceptive and Feeling Meyers Briggs profile, that is the hard wiring of our nature says people like me become ministers, priests, counselors, social workers and massage therapists. It really says that!
MY COMMENT - Hi Dennis!
For some reason, I am not surprised to learn your Meyers - Briggs score says people like you become ministers, counselors, social workers and massage therapists. I read everything you write on this website as well as I read some of your articles on your e-zine site. You come across as honest, open, straight forward and sincere. As I said before, you were probably in the minority of WCG ministers that were well suited for their profession. Most, however, should not have been ministers - they were roll modeling their boss, HWA.
The Armstrongs (Richard David and Loma excluded) were horrible examples to the "young Ambassadors". One can only speculate how different things could have turned out for the R/WCG had Richard David not been killed in the auto accident while Don Billingsley was driving. Armstrong's "fear religion business" success without a successor became failure as your learned from the whole Tkach experience. By the way, I suspect Billingsley's unwaivered blind loyalty and support of HWA is deeply rooted in feelings of guilt and responsibility for the death of the alleged Apostle's son, Richard Armstrong. I feel sorry for Billingsley, and I hope he can finally find it in his heart to forgive himself. It was a horrible accident.
With respect to my comments regarding the youthful "green around the ears" Ambassador College graduates made ministers without any real life experience, I would like to share an excerpt from my essay that contains e-mail exchange with a minister now in the UCG. I know how much Tom Mahon loves reading excerpts from my unpublished essay, so I am happy to provide this excerpt from "My Reflections of the Worldwide Church of God - 1972 In Prophecy! God's Practical Joke?". Here is what RCG/WCG/UCG minister F.K. said to me when I e-mailed him regarding statements I recorded in a January, 1969 sermon entitled "Have you ever thought of your own death. This minister made the statement that I recorded in my notes "in the next three years, there is a good chance you will die - when you die, be brave and die faithfully. Here is his e-mail response when I threw his words at him over 30 years later:
Back To the Future
While writing this essay, I began contacting people from the 1960s and 1970s Worldwide Church of God for the first time in over twenty five years. One of the responses provides healing for me personally. Early in this essay, I mentioned F.K.’s January, 1969 sermon. I found minister F.K. through the internet, and I sent him an e-mail containing the excerpts from this e-mail and asked him if he had any comments – 30 years later. Here is the reply e-mail I received:
Dear Richard [LAST NAME],
I'm sorry to not have replied sooner. I have been in Nigeria and just returned late last night. I turned on the computer about an hour ago and found over 250 emails waiting.
I would like to apologize for the comments that you mentioned. In 1969 I was just 29 years old, too young to be a pastor. Many of the things I said and did in the first years of my ministry are a great embarrassment to me. I was a young fool. I apologize to both you and God.
End of Excerpt
Thirty years later, I respect and forgive this WCG minister. But, we never received any apologies from HWA or GTA.
Glad to read that you and I are connected through Keith Thomas and my father. I know my father respected Mr. Thomas, and coming from my father that said a lot. They had similar backgrounds. I understand where you are coming from in your statement about the ones from WWII being set in their ways.
I'm sorry Tom is a Moron and made the comment about your hair and saying you were in it for the beer. Please humor us Dennis by telling us you really were in it for the beer (kidding). By the way, that was great article you wrote, "The Two Witnesses; They're Everywhere. Thanks!
Richard
PS - I was vacationing in Myrtle Beach South Carolina a couple weeks ago.
Paul said: "Please humor us Dennis by telling us you really were in it for the beer (kidding)."
I didn't learn to drink until I was sent to Chicago under George Kemnitz!
“According to the COG7 book on church history, if memory serves, Herbert Armstrong and 11 other men in that fellowship were ordained as apostles on the same day. I'm no longer sure of the number, but the word "apostle" is definitely the word used.”
No, ‘fraid your memory didn’t serve.
The time was 4th Nov 1933. There were 145 COG7 ministers names submitted, and drawn at random. 12 were drawn to correspond to the 12 apostles. HWA was not drawn as one of the twelve.
However then the seventy to ‘go forth two by two’ were drawn. HWA’s name was among these seventy.
HWA had been ordained by the Oregon Conference of the Church of God in 1931. Dispite his starting RCOG in 1934, his minister’s licence was renewed annually by COG7 until 1937.
This drawing of lots, and this issuing of a ministerial licence was done by a church which apparently HWA ‘never joined’.
Questeruk said, "This drawing of lots, and this issuing of a ministerial licence was done by a church which apparently HWA ‘never joined’.
MY COMMENT - Yeah right, and pigs fly!
Let's also not forget that HWA was baptized by a Baptist minister. I don't think we ever heard an explanation from HWA about how his baptism, by a "non-COG worldly religion" Baptist minister, could be ever be valid given what he taught about Church eras and that he was part of the unbroken line of the one true church tracing back to Christ. How could his baptism be valid, given what Armstrong taught?
Richard
Back to the topic of the latest issue of The Journal. A relevant quote from the Warren incident:
"Church members who have criticized Mr. Havir have also leveled the charge that he has assumed too much power in the congregation."
(This in regards to the group that has split from Havir's splinter the "Texas Fellowship". These were the ones openly chastised in the church's monthly bulletin for not giving Havir "due respect".)
Here's my question though: The board members interviewed neither confirmed nor denied that Warren was disfellowshipped. What's the scoop?
Post a Comment