Friday, April 12, 2013

LCG In More Turmoil: Letter From James Scarborough



Things just seem to get worse every day in Living Church of God.

This is from Bob Thiel's blog:

I am sending this email to most of the LCG ministry. Some of you know my family very well, some probably do not. I am reaching out to any ministers who remain faithful to the truth, so you will know what is going on.

Our Background
Ralph & Patricia Scarborough, and their eight children, began attending Worldwide Church of God in 1968. Four more children were born into the church over the following years. We were taught all the fundamental teachings of the Church of God through Herbert W. Armstrong until the time of his death in 1986. After his death the apostasy occurred, which led to the exodus of those who continued to believe the teachings of Mr. Armstrong were still valid. In 1995 almost all the Scarborough’s, along with several thousand others, left Worldwide to join the work Mr. Meredith had begun in 1993. My father told his children he would not be tricked by new truth a second time. We, as a family, supported Mr. Meredith, and our local minster Mr. Gerald Weston, in service to the Global Church of God.
 
When the takeover of GCG took place, Mr. Meredith came to my parents’ house, sat with us over dinner, and discussed the situation. My father told him to begin again, and most of the people would follow him because we do not follow an organization. Mr. Meredith went back to San Diego and started the Living Church of God. The Scarborough family provided Computer Servers, workstations and a complete network, all at our own expense. Two of our family members delivered, and installed the equipment at LCG headquarters. The Scarborough family provided all the internet services for LCG, for free, until a few years ago. Our lives are committed to the service of God, His people, and His work. We have never tried to gain any position, or recognition in the church. You may stop here and say that’s exactly what we are doing by sending this email? Please read on.
 
What is this all about?
About seven years ago some of us began to see changes in the focus of the Gospel. It is not relevant if you agree with the changes, or not; the following is the point. It was told to Mr. Meredith that two of the Scarborough brothers had problems with LCG’s “better understanding” about the Gospel message. That very week the local minister called my brother David, and I, to a private room after Sabbath services and asked, as he was instructed by Mr. Meredith, if this was true. We spent some time explaining the Gospel message as we had been taught all our lives. As it happened another minister, who was visiting Kansas City, was asked to attend our meeting. Much to our surprise he agreed with my brother and myself. We were instructed, by the local minister, to keep our opinions to ourselves, which we agreed since we had no interest in causing division.
 
Over the following years the issue seemed to become less of a focus, but we noticed after Mr. Bryce left LCG that a new focus on Jesus Christ began to emerge. One Pentecost we received a fine Passover Sermon for the morning service, and before the afternoon service the elder giving the message began with “Maybe we should mention here that it is Pentecost”. Much to our surprise he went into another sermon about Jesus Christ; not Pentecost. Not long after that CAD sent out instructions to those giving messages, at the Feast of Tabernacles, to give sermons on the topic of the Feast. Why should this be necessary?
 
About four years ago we started to hear of further upgrades/changes to the doctrines of the church, and finally after the death of Mr. Apartian it became clear there was no turning back. On December 25th 2010 we heard a sermon, by the local minister, titled “In the Name of Jesus Christ”. The messages following began to focus on the changes, and ridiculed those who did not understand. In January 2011 the Scarborough family, with the exception of those in Charlotte, and a couple of nephews, agreed to discontinue fellowship with the Living Church of God. Our eldest brother set up a meeting with the local minister and all the adults of our family. The minister was informed of our decision, and some of the more serious reasons for our decision. The minister then asked the family to consider remaining until Mr. Meredith came to town for a Tomorrows World public event, which was to happen just before the spring Holydays. Mr. Meredith wanted to meet with us, and discuss the problems. All agreed with the exception of David and I. Mr. Meredith came to town and said he would meet with my mother, and eldest brother only, at a restaurant. We declined because there was no real opportunity to discuss our issues in such an environment. When asked why he would not meet with us as a family, the response was that he did not want to be surrounded by a bunch of Scarborough’s. Please remember we are the same family he sat with when he was being thrown out of GCG, and who served him faithfully. There was no hostility, or anger, on our part. We just disagreed with the changes and we were going to stop attending LCG. Over the following months the family was corrected from the pulpit, not by name, but by the messages. Saying the changes were what Mr. Armstrong taught, but in private we were told the changes were not that different. Finally before the fall Holydays my mother, and one of the elder brothers, had a meeting with the local minister, and the local elder, on the topic of Idolatry. My mother prepared literature from the days of Mr. Armstrong, which she tried to present as what we were once taught. The following Sabbath the minister, in his sermon, said you could have a whole stack of books and still be wrong. This being taken for what it was; my brother, which had been in the meeting, quietly got up and left. He even left his children there asking his oldest daughter to make sure his son got home. My mother got up and left shortly after. The following week the family did not attend with LCG. On Atonement Mr. Meredith marked the entire family with the exception of those sitting in service. His excuse was that we did not believe Jesus Christ was a vital part of the Gospel. We had made it clear, in every discussion we had with the ministry, we believed what Mr. Armstrong taught about the Gospel of the Kingdom. So it must be that Mr. Armstrong did not agree with Mr. Meredith. Why would an entire family be marked, on a solemn day like Atonement, for holding on to the truth? There was no evidence we were causing division, with the exception of 2 people in the family postings about what we were once taught as the truth. That is 2 people out of more than 60. At no time did anyone try to present any new truth. A year later we were informed others were beginning to question new teachings, other than the Gospel. We were also told they were being intimidated worse than the Scarborough family had been. It was at that time some of us decided to put the truth out about what we know about the Gospel, and since people were saying we were not marked. We put out the audio of the local minister reading the marking from Mr. Meredith on http://www.genuine-truth.com. This site has been updated periodically.
 
This last summer Mr. Winnail offered to come to Kansas City to talk to the family, but there was no interest, with the exception of my brother David and I. We had a cordial discussion for over three hours about what we saw as changes. Nothing was resolved, but that was not a surprise. The last item we discussed was the marking of the Scarborough family. There was no reason given other than it was the way we left. My brother David, and I, left many months before the rest of the family, and the rest did nothing but stop attending. Many more are currently being disfellowshipped and marked over disagreements about the changes. This sounds very similar to the first century church. How many today have said I would not do what they did? Or were those making the changes, who would not even receive the Apostle John, right because they had the authority? They were disfellowshipping anyone who disagreed because they did not want anyone hearing the truth!
 
My sister Glenda was fired by LCG the day before Atonement last year just because she was sending out sermons, which was her job. LCG did not like that some of the sermons were given by Mr. Carl McNair, and Mr. John Ogwyn, and the fact some messages disagreed with LCG’s new teaching. This may not concern some, but the fact she was in the middle of cancer treatment should be of concern to any human being, not to mention us as Christians! She was called into Mr. Meredith’s office yesterday, and told to stop defending those who have been wrongfully marked. Even though she knows the truth. You see, her friend Thomas Boca II, who had recently quit attending LCG because things he saw going on at headquarters, had just been deemed “An enemy of the Church” just because he had posted some of his views on the web, and Glenda stood by her friend. Mr. Meredith also told her in this meeting that she, and her entire Scarborough family, are liars. Imagine this was you. How would you feel? I guess when you don’t need someone’s support; character assassination is justified. Didn’t Cain murder Abel because he was angry? We can prove all we are saying to anyone who cares. Bearing false witness against your neighbor is one of the 10 commandments; we do not take it lightly. We have not attacked anyone. We have only disagreed with the changes. How can this be the Philadelphian Church? How can this be any Church of God? How can you blindly follow men who walk and talk piously, while devouring the sheep? Maybe there is a line in the sand you are waiting for them to cross. Mr. Meredith says LCG will not do away with the fundamentals. Well how about the 10 commandments. I was told that if you had a heart, or cross, or statues of angels in your possession that it was not a sin, we just cannot bow down, or worship them. Mr. Meredith gave a sermon here in Kansas City where he said “nowhere in the Bible does it say the cross is pagan, or you can’t do anything with the cross”. I know he uses the picket fences comparison, but that is being used to make anyone who hates idolatry look ridiculous. A member, after the sermon, happily stated Mr. Meredith said the cross was okay. Divorce & Remarriage is out of control, and this is from the ministry. Trust me, if you don’t already know what is going on, you don’t want to. And then there is the 9th commandment. This one only applies to the members. The ministry can say anything they want to protect THEIR church.
 
We are meeting as God’s people here in Kansas City; with others who have seen the problems and left LCG over the past few weeks. Many more are joining us online. We are God’s people. We know the voice of our Shepherd; Jesus Christ. We do not have a ministry attending to us, which is so sad that the sheep have to step out before the ministry, but we will put God first, and love our neighbor as ourselves. We will wait until God sends His faithful servants, but we will not give up the faith once delivered. We are NOT starting a church; we are members of the Church of God no matter what lies are conjured.
 
If you think you are in the Church of God just because you don’t see a “better” place to go, then you are failing at your responsibilities. We have been down this path recently. I have seen the other groups, and there is no place doing what God instructed, but you can discern that LCG is no better than the least of them. This may make some angry, but you are known by your fruits. If you say LCG is doing more of a work than anyone else. Well that is shifting toward David Pack. Would you really go with RCG just because they start doing more of a work than LCG? Most would probably go with CoGWA if LCG fails. I would just say this. I have attended with CoGWA, and see they are clearly God’s people. They also fit the description, as an organization, of Laodicea, which even though they have desires to do more; their form of government will not permit what is required. Even some in their ministry understand this truth. I know what God says will happen to them, and I want to be a Philadelphian with all that God says to, and instructs, the Philadelphian era. Remember the definition of Philadelphia. Does God see it in us?
 
James Scarborough

104 comments:

DennisCDiehl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael said...

The church smorgasbord continues...
Can the members, even the ones who leave, come to see that all this is on the level of trying to decide which club they want to belong to? Hmm, should I go with UCG, with RCG, with FCG, with WCG(xxx)...
The Westside Bingo club doesn't allow T-shirts, Im going with Eastside. I would attend Southside but the club director doesn't like me... Then there's Northside Bingo club. Hmmmmmmm...... They're much larger and their parties are cooler...

Michael said...

Dennis,
Paul won out indeed, albeit posthumously, and likely with the other apostles rolling in their graves.
Imagine, this fellow comes out of the blue, never met their lord, but claims to have one vision on the road to Damascus, and totally usurps the message - now it's a Gentile church! :-)

Anonymous said...

I remember HWA ranting about the false churches that preach about Jesus but not about His Gospel, of the Kingdom of God. His simplistic view suggests that there is only one small message that is the gospel. How did Paul describe the Gospel? I Cor 15:2-5 The Good News is that Christ died for our sins . . . " It is also good news, or the Gospel that he came the first time as recorded in Matt, Mark, Luke and John. Might I suggest that there is another Gospel in the NT? Have you considered that the Book of Revelation might be thought of as the Fifth Gospel? Isn't it Good News to know that Jesus was still on his throne, that he knows what is going on in the churches, that he has a plan for the future, that Jesus will come again and that there will be a New Heaven and a New Earth? So the Churches of God can say, "The Gospel of the Kingdom is about His second coming!" Others can say, "The Gospel is about Jesus and what he did for mankind." Isn't the Gospel more than just one point? Yes, it is good news that Jesus is going to return. But, isn't it also good news that he came the first time, also?
As for the idea that Paul won the theological battle over James, the Gentiles over the Jews, perhaps there were no winners or losers. A new dispensation arrived, a new set of rules, just as the Law of Moses didn't exist before Moses. Did Moses "win" over Abraham?

DennisCDiehl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DennisCDiehl said...

If people would put all of Paul's real or imagined writings FIRST in the NT, Acts.Revelation then the Gospels and letters to follow, what was really going on would clear up.

Douglas Becker said...

No, wait! I see what's wrong with all of this!

This whole crisis is based on the very wrong assumption that Herbert Armstrong was right about something.

Somebody didn't do their homework.

Michael said...

And that early believers just took schizophrenic, hallucinating Paul at his word(s), over that of people who (we presume) lived with Jesus day-in and day-out for 3+ years, is nothing short of amazing.
But then of course the gospel writers also took scriptures way way way out of context in their attempt to make Jesus fulfill scriptures (my favorite is the one about him riding into Jerusalem on, no not one, but two donkeys! due to a misapprehension of one of the OT literary devices:::::)
I would like to say that kind of stuff only passed muster in ancient times, but as we all know, that sure ain't so.

Michael said...

Douglas,

HWA was the legendary figure, and most of these groups has at the top a leader who idolized him, thinks he was mostly right, and are now attempting to live their fantasy of being the one "carrying on the real work". It many ways it really seems to be a competition about who's attracting the most existing members, not even about who's doing the "work" the best.
Case in point: Pack's recent letters about how everyone's going to come scuttling home to his group! Very soon, i tell ya!

Anonymous said...

The total mess up of Matthew about the "Colt, the foal of an ass" in the OT using it to craft the story of Jesus entry into Jerusalem is "the smoking gun" of NT theology showing no one actually knew what Jesus did so they went to the OT to find "types" Matthew thought they were two animals and had jesus ride "on both of them" . Of course other Gospel writers saw this screw up and fixed it in their story copied

dd.

Anonymous said...

Matthew's entire birth story is cobbled from OT scripture. No one actually knew Jesus birth circumstances so they made up a good one. Luke obviously never read Matthew as they don't come close to being the same story. In John is not the Messiah because the people knew the messiah came from Bethlehem and "we know where you are from." (Nazareth?) SO they did not hear of Matthew's story yet and it was added to original Matthew years later when "we were not born of fornication" issues had to be addressed.

Douglas Becker said...

HWA was the legendary figure, and most of these groups has at the top a leader who idolized him, thinks he was mostly right, and are now attempting to live their fantasy of being the one "carrying on the real work".

Michael, yes, of course, but as you very well know, it doesn't matter what people think and believe, it was idolatry, fantasy and they only thing "they" are carrying out is his sublime wrongness (is that a word? I'm not sure that's a word -- but it could be -- could I be wrong to use the word for indicating the truth that pretty much everything he said was like, totally wrong, especially his non prophecy prophecies that made him a false prophet, but he wasn't a prophet because he was an Apostle, but he was a prophet because he was an end time Elijah, so he had to be a prophet if he was Elijah, right?).

While we are at it, can the LCG finally settle once and for all, which end of the egg to crack: The big end or the little end? Meredith's implied authority should be useful for something, so why doesn't he tell us how to crack our eggs? We need this settled and he's the only one to settle it.

Head Usher said...

Looks like some people finally noticed that ministers will say anything and do anything to protect their business. Only members are supposed to follow the rules. For ministers there aren't necessarily any rules at all.

Not to say that there aren't some, like Dennis who hung on to their integrity, but those men often don't last. The guys who remain for 40 to 50 years, like Meredith, I can't imagine that they've gotten to where they are and been able to stay there for so long without eventually having to shuck off all their scruples.

I hope that's an appropriate-sized brush, Dennis :)

Anonymous said...

Just a thought;
Let’s suppose that a Hollywood director would decide to create a movie that depicted the origin of life and he replicated an animated universe that had an earth such as the one where we exist. He starts with the existence of man and woman and the purpose of creating functioning communities that would bring order and productivity to planet earth as an example for other orbs in the universe. He uses a large number of actors drawn from an ordinary multicultural environment to simulate the growth, but everyone the freedom to fill in the details without providing a script.
I wonder what the end result of such a movie would be.
A. Boocher

Anonymous said...

The end result of such a movie would be a ton of cash flushed down a very large toilet.

Anonymous said...

James Scarborough wrote: "...I guess when you don’t need someone’s support; character assassination is justified. Didn’t Cain murder Abel because he was angry? We can prove all we are saying to anyone who cares..."

That looks like a character assassination of Cain. Where did the anger come from? What does the Bible say as to why Cain killed his brother? Why did Pharaoh kill so many male babies when Moses was a small child? Why did Herod have male babies killed less than 2 years of age around the time Christ was a small child? Is it anger?

Being angry, or anger, is not a fruit of God's spirit, but it is the fruit of a spirit. Why did Cain kill Abel?

"Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother." I John 3:12

Why so many lies from Rod Meredith regarding members of the Scarborough family? That's just more evil fruit, but from where?

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
" John 8:44

The Scarboroughs appear, based upon James' letter, to be doing the best they can without being part of the Living group and any involvement with Meredith/Winnail etc. and many others have been, are, and will be on a similar path in a scattered condition, which was predicted.

There is a verse that may have something to do with all of the scattered movements of sheep that may be applicable for some:

"I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture." John 10:9

A pasture may be "greener," and look good, but that doesn't necessarily make it so. By their fruits you know them...as James Scarborough admitted...

John

Leonardo said...

I suppose the ending would all depend upon what the script-writer wants it to be!

But I've often wondered if there aren't other civilizations of sentient beings on other planets scattered throughout the far flung reaches of the cosmos - perhaps even beyond in other multi-universes. History teaches us that human beings always see themselves as the center and epitome of creation, though scientific discoveries such as helio-centricism and the deep-space observations of Edwin Hubble in the 1920's (that our galaxy, previously assumed to be the totality of the cosmos, was only one of billions out there) has seemed to make man ever smaller and less significant in his own estimation. Just a speculative thought at present, though the Drake Equation suggests that it very well may be the case, and that formula only applies to just the Milky Way galaxy alone!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

Leonardo said...

...Even though, Mr. Boocher, you specified there wouldn't be a script, still, the DNA of such "actors" would inevitably provide such a "script" of sorts. Uh, oh, do I detect the beginnings of that ever popular discussion - free will versus determinism - coming on?

John's above comment carelessly assumes virtually unlimited free will on our part. Perhaps we may not have as much as we would like to presume.

Lurker said...

So, Dennis, how do you suggest those who depart from Armstrongism, but somehow end up still believing in a God resolve James, Peter, John and Paul? Is there any way to do so?

Perhaps Douglas Adams was right and the real answer is 42.

Joe Moeller said...

It appears that within Merediths group there are a lot of people in the closet, both members and ministers.

Meredith is like Tito in Yugoslavia. As soon as he goes their will be a "Balkanization" of LCG. Larry Salyer is on COGWAs board and has a lot of connections with LCG ministry.

This may be a COGWA strategy, looking to pickup a healthy chunk of LCG after Meredith dies.

One thing appears very apparent though, LCG will not survive intact after RCM passes. It will likely divide along 3 lines... Jim Meredith, Pack and Cogwa.
UCG may pickup a few stragglers as well.

Joe Moeller
Cody, WY

Anonymous said...

Is there a real conflict between the early apostles? Did Paul really hijack Christianity? Did Moses highjack anything from Abraham? Weren't the Law of Moses a package that was only for one group of people for one period of time (Moses to Pentecost) but not for the church? Didn't Acts 15 show that the Church only had to keep the Law of Noah? Weren't the Law of Moses temporary, a shadow of things to come? Was there really a conflict with one group winning and another loosing? I don't think so. Didn't Paul say that one day is as good as another and that those with a Jewish background could, if they choose, continue to hold to their traditions from the OT, but they were not to be imposed on Gentiles?
I don't think anyone hijacked anything from anyone.

Anonymous said...

DennisCDiehl I agree that Paul had it more right than the others. However, it's possible the others, at least some of them eventually came around to Paul's view of the true Christianity, and moved away from the corrupt Jewish Christian view. COGs and many other churches are so off the mark I sometimes wonder if they are simply synagogues of Satan. Not sure really. In any case, they are cults and best to avoid them like the plague.

Lake of Fire Church of God said...

The dumb sheep just don't get it!

The work of God - preaching the gospel around the world as a witness - ended when Herbert W. Armstrong died.

Mr. Armstrong said it himself on several occasions before his death. I left the Church in 1976, and I know this. Why doesn't Mr. Scarborough and the rest know it? This very statement by Mr. Armstrong is recorded on a couple You Tube video clips.

Ever since Mr. Armstrong's death, its been a mad dash to see who could GET (God's way is GIVE, not GET) the most tithe slave sheep by the competing COGs. Of course, the multi multi millionaire little Joey Tkach got the grand prize hijacking the all the Church's assets for a luxurious retirement of a small handful of people - ALL paid for by the sacrifices of our parents and families.

It was quite a joke Mr. Armstrong played on everybody after stringing us along all those years.

God truly does call the weak of the world - the base things - to provide financial security and an income stream for the wolves in sheep's clothing. If people would listen to Mr. Armstrong's final words in his last years, there is no need for LCG, UCG, RCG, PCG, etc. because the work has been completed.

Richard

Anonymous said...

Anon stated "Is there a real conflict between the early apostles? Did Paul really hijack Christianity?" Definitely! Read the NT. For example, look at Acts 15 where the church at Jerusalem were in heated dispute over whether Gentiles were to follow the Mosaic Law and be circumcised. James made a compromise and said no but they had to follow a few basic principles that are listed in that chapter. What this shows is James and much of that church at that time discriminated between converted Jews and converted Gentiles. Paul had it right. He did not discriminate between them. Also look up Paul's confrontation with Peter in Galatians 2:11-21. I can imagine there were some very angry moments by Paul at that point against Peter's cowardliness and retreat back to the Jewish dietary rules, which are now defunct under true Christianity. Peter's rejected the Gentiles for being "uncircumcised" because he felt embarrassed or worse in front of other Jews. It was a very cowardly and non-Christian thing to do. Again Paul had it right and did not distinguish between Gentiles and Jews when it came to the true teachings of the Gospel messages. Neither should the COGs but they do and they are wrong, very wrong.

DennisCDiehl said...

I have said it before but I feel there is credible evidence that Paul was the apostle that Jesus commended the Ephesian Church in Revelation for dealing with those who "say they are jews and are not..." and say they are Apostles and are found wanting etc. Even Paul said all those in Asia forsoke him and Ephesus, home of John's ministry actually who never mentions Paul, is in Asia of course.

Paul to Ephesians: I am an Apostle
Ephesians To Paul: No you are not
Jesus to Ephesians: Well done

So in this book and case, Jewish Christians won out over Gentile. Revelation ws written by Jewish Christians to encourage Jewish Christians just before the fall of Jerusalem in my view. Just as Daniel was written , not in the 6th century, but the second by Jews to encourage the Jews and Maccabeans against Rome.

James said...

The Good News on the World Tomorrow.
The Meredith family business is failing. We can all expect more sanity in the world.

Anonymous said...

A personal thought:
It seems many commenting here may not considered one of the prepositions that I assume was the purpose in God’s choosing Israel as His people.

A simple explanation is that they were to become an ideal kingdom that would serve as an example for the other kingdoms that made up the world’s population.

Of course Israel flubbed up and this necessitated the sending His Son to establish a community of people who have the indwelling of a Holy Spirit enabling them to be internally transformed and groomed to populate a spiritual kingdom, which may populate the universe.

It looks they are on the brink of flubbing up big time and it will be interesting to see what corrections will made to avoid scrapping the whole project.

I will say that if we have lost faith in God it might help if we had few more people finding that faith. I read a blurb in a book titled “The Crack in the Cosmic Egg” that claimed that if enough people believe something it becomes reality of course I can’t validate this as being true.
A. Boocher

Corky said...

Not against Rome, Dennis. Daniel was written as encouragement against Alexander IV Epiphanes who sacrificed swine on the alter of the temple and outlawed Judaism.

Byker Bob said...

I can't think of a single other sect identifying itself as Christian where people would complain about Jesus Christ being emphasized more, or too much, deferring rather to their teacher (in this case, HWA).

It is fine to say you preach the gospel Jesus did. That was Jesus' focus while He was alive. However, the fact that He was crucified, lay in the tomb, and was resurrected, and became our Savior certainly is a further modifying series of events, ie the rest of the story, and became a very important part of the gospel which the disciples preached. It's all through the Book of the Acts of the Apostles, even the parts which predate St. Paul.

It seems that in his zeal to be "God's Apostle" himself, HWA has diminished the role of Jesus' Disciples and Apostles, and the gospel message which they preached, which was most certainly devoted to Jesus Himself.

Armstrongian theology is horribly based on semantics, and misses so many deep spiritual truths and experiences. And, apparently it causes permanent damage in some, so in their minds, new truth or better understanding is incapable of producting correction.

This whole Scarborough affair is yet another ludicrous example of the things that happen in the Armstrong world.

BB

Corky said...

Which was the abomination that made the temple desolate, by the way, and led to the Maccabean revolt.

Douglas Becker said...

Watching the Cult of Herbert Armstrong seems a lot like seeing Walt Disney's 1979 "The Black Hole" in the theater.

Some people walked out during the movie. Those that stayed until that ending walked out frustrated and angry because of the ending, which only made sense in retrospect as some sort of ethereal abstract metaphysical high concept.

You just know that when Dr. Hans Reinhardt disappears from the scene (albeit in "heck" -- since Disney didn't allow bad words back then), nothing will be quite the same.

We all liked Maximilian as the weird and creepy robot villain who said nothing but was threatening all the less (not unlike Meredith as second-in-command to Herbert Armstrong).

It seems that's where the CoGs are headed -- into the black hole.

It may be (or no) fun to watch, but it just isn't fun to be a part of it.

Heck of a drama, though.

Douglas Becker said...

Oh, Corky, and here I thought the abomination which made desolate had something to do with Joe Tkatch.

Assistant Deacon said...

Sorry to not participate in the long philosophical detour on this thread about...whatever, but...

...are we supposed to sympathize somehow with this Scarborough fellow?

He parrots "the apostasy" gobbledygook.

He refers to the "takeover" of Global, as if RCM was innocent (not like now, when he's anything but).

He describes how his father said they would follow RCM out of Global because they would not follow "an organization." Um...ever heard of following Jesus?

Oh, wait...he actually complains about his church preaching Jesus; so I guess that explains that.

He says they were disfellowshipped from LCG even though there was no evidence they were causing division...except for two people who were posting things online. What?

He complains that RCM referred to his family as "liars" -- which is essentially what RCM said about the old Global board 20 years ago. What part of RCM's nature are they only beginning to perceive? How does he feel now about following a man and not an organization back then?

He says they are not starting a church. (Yawn.) Never heard that one before.

He says LCG is no better than the least of all the other groups. And COGWA is Laodicea. And this, and that, so knowlegeable, so righteous in his unwillingness to, you know, cause division.

Which is why, of course, he says nothing about holding meetings, or others leaving LCG, or any of that. Right? R-I-I-I-I-I-G-H-T.

Please. What an old story. We've heard it all before. Please, James, put a sock in it and go away. You cast your lot with the guy. Man up and live with the consequences.

Velvet said...

....and people were worried that United was in cahoots with Junior?

Everything in this letter is 1993 all over again. Everything.

What I don't understand is why this letter makes it seem like Spanky, the hardest of the hardliners, has suddenly gone soft for Biblical idols (other than making an idol of Armstrong, I mean, everyone knows he's done that all his life). Spanky would be the last person on earth I would put money on to go for the errors of professing Christianity.

"most of these groups has at the top a leader who idolized him, thinks he was mostly right, and are now attempting to live their fantasy of being the one "carrying on the real work"."

Right, and idolatry by any name (or to/in/for any name) is what will bring down the wrath of God (literally). As Spanky seems to be finding out. Now if only the rest of them (including Junior) would come to that conclusion, there might be a chance for the Church after all.

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath, either.

"So, Dennis, how do you suggest those who depart from Armstrongism, but somehow end up still believing in a God resolve James, Peter, John and Paul? Is there any way to do so?"

I'm not Dennis Lurker, but if you're departing from worshipping/idolizing a man, you're on the right track, in my opinion. And you can "resolve James, Peter, John, and Paul" very easily - it's called rejecting the idol-worship of bibliolatry, or what professing Christians refer to as "inerrancy."

As for where to go to services...pray about it. Either you'll get an answer, and all necessary doors will open to enable you to attend with whatever group you are called to attend (as long as you don't fall prey to any false gospels that might be floating around in said group when you're there), or the answer will be no, and all doors will close. Even if it's not the "group" you wanted in the first place.

*shrug* That's what happened to me. By the way, I am NOT referring to any of the splinter groups, above; there are non-trinitarian Anabaptist Sabbatarian groups still around, but none that have all three.

As to where God wants you, Lurker, only God knows that. There's a certain skill set in listening for "the still small voice" that caused Ezekiel to wrap his mantle about his face because the presence of God was there.

Best of luck!

Velvet said...

"Ever since Mr. Armstrong's death, its been a mad dash to see who could GET (God's way is GIVE, not GET) the most tithe slave sheep by the competing COGs. Of course, the multi multi millionaire little Joey Tkach got the grand prize hijacking the all the Church's assets for a luxurious retirement of a small handful of people - ALL paid for by the sacrifices of our parents and families."

I agree with Richard. Except, I'm not bitter about the money that went to the Work before the apostasy; and conveniently, my father (conveniently for my father, I mean) stopped tithing after the apostasy, so Junior didn't get a red cent from my family.

Currently, the Americans get a certain percentage (think it might be 12%) off the top of ALL the tithes and offerings given nationally in Canada; from what I understand, so there is no skimming from the UK pot however I'm not 100% on that. (I give tithe of the tithe and Holy Day offerings during the feast to the Church in the UK.)

Given how paltry the annual tithes are in Canada (from what I can tell), I don't imagine Junior and the missus are living very high off the hog from us. Which I suppose is why they spend most of their time in the videos trying to SELL some stupid pop culture Christianist books! (Speaking of the way of get.)

I still give tithes and offerings, but there's a reason for my doing so; you're supposed to put where you want the funds to go, i.e., school in Africa, disaster relief, etc. (not that any of the money actually goes to any of those things), but I always mark my tithes and Holy Day offerings for exactly what they are...first tithe and Holy Day offerings.

They're not going to begrudge me giving them the money. But they also won't be able to lie through their teeth like they do, and say any of MY money went to X, Y, or Z.

That said, the congregations in this province gave a princely chunk of change to some African Evangelical ex-lawyer with a swanky house in Loma Linda, allegedly to repair the foundation of some nursing "school" in Africa (they tack on the false gospel with the first aid training, apparently), and said foundation of the building still hasn't been poured yet. It's been over a year....

I'm not bitter about that, though, I look at it this way: I gave my money in good faith, if it's not being used to further the true gospel (or even ANY gospel, true or false), I'M not the one who will have to answer for that.

Velvet said...

Paul to Ephesians: I am an Apostle
Ephesians To Paul: No you are not
Jesus to Ephesians: Well done


I partially agree with this, Dennis, but you can't deny the fact that professing Christians misread Paul pretty badly themselves....

Velvet said...

"I can't think of a single other sect identifying itself as Christian where people would complain about Jesus Christ being emphasized more, or too much, deferring rather to their teacher"

I dunno, Bob, those Messianic Jews you're always on about certainly fill the bill, from where I'm sitting: Some of them try to actually reconcile the claim that ALL the ceremonial laws of the Torah are still valid AND Jesus was "just a good prophet" BUT they still bow to the trinitarian pagan idols AND "if you have any questions, do what your rabbi tells you to".

So, they, like other professing Christians, focus on Jesus' death because that's all that's important to them. The resurrection doesn't even come into the picture at all for these people, because to acknowledge that, would mean they would then be answerable to a present, living, Saviour and High Priest. And nobody in the world really wants that, now, do they?

Which is why it is far easier for people to raise their hands to the sun-god at the spring equinox, instead of DOING the commandments of the Son of God Himself. (Which include the Ten Commandments, by the way: "Before Abraham was, I AM.")

Velvet said...

"He describes how his father said they would follow RCM out of Global because they would not follow "an organization." Um...ever heard of following Jesus?"

LOL that was literally my first thought when I read the letter. After that, I skimmed the rest.

Anonymous said...

Velveeta,

For in-depth audio studies on Paul's imaginary Jesus.

http://radio.yadayahweh.com/



http://www.gcnlive.com/programs/shatteringMyths/

Anonymous said...

Dave Pack is already dancing on LCG's grave:

Friday, April 12, 2013

In shades of Ron Weinland, the ghoul Pack is now gloating over the expected deaths of LCG ministers and wives.

What an ass!

Anonymous said...

Blood in the water. The sharks--Flurry, Pack, COGWA, Theil--must be licking their chops.

Anonymous said...

Blood in the water. The sharks--Flurry, Pack, COGWA, Theil--must be licking their chops.

What Pack seems not to realize is that ACOG brethren are mostly finished with the nonsense of moving from group to group. These days, when people leave their big group, most don't go to another big group, they become independents and fellowship with other independents.

Pack may get maybe 10 percent of the departing LCG membership, and COGWA maybe 5 percent, but most LCG members are in LCG not because they think Rod Meredith is so wonderful, but because LCG is the big group they find least objectionable. Once LCG becomes objectionable to them, most will retire to their living rooms, not to Pack's campus or Flurry's compound.

Anonymous said...


Velvet said...

"I'm not bitter about that, though, I look at it this way: I gave my money in good faith, if it's not being used to further the true gospel (or even ANY gospel, true or false), I'M not the one who will have to answer for that."



That is just the way you look at it, not necessarily the way anyone should ever look at it.

You could still become bitter in the future when it turns out that you will have to answer for your own behavior of carelessly giving "God's tenth" (not yours) to evil people.

In theory, you can try to support the truth and good with money, or you can support lies and evil with money, or you can try to do neither.

It seems to me that actually knowingly financially supporting lies and evil is the very worst option. And I do realize that trying to support the truth and good with cash is easier said than done. After all, some people who just wanted to support the truth of God did just get tricked and defrauded by crooks like Gerald Flurry and so many others.

Anonymous said...

Concerning April 12 2:28 p.m. response to my comment. I didn't express myself very well. Yes, there was conflict in Galatia and other churches which led to the Church Conference in Act 15. But rather than thinking that someone hijacked the church, I think that in church conference of Acts 15 they all came to understand that the Law of Moses was temporary, and not to be imposed on the church, only the Seven Laws of Noah were to be enforced. Did the Jewish Christians lose to the Gentle Christians? I don't think anyone won or lost. I think they all came to realize that Gentiles were not obligated to observe the Law of Moses. Paul continued to observe many of them, which was his right. This does not prove that the NT church felt compelled to observed the Sabbath, Pentecost, etc, as HWA taught. In Acts 23:6 Paul described himself as a Pharisee (not a former Jew who became a Christian). Paul was a Messianic Jew or as some say, "completed Jew", a Jew who accepted the Messiah Jesus. He continued (by choice) to observe his Jewish customs, but did not impose them onto the Church. Lastly, I want to thank whoever put this website together and everyone who has contributed their comments. I enjoy this sight.

Anonymous said...

This is off the subject, but I came across something that I found of interest. At AC there were two female faculty members who were NEVER members of the WCG. Do any of you remember Velma Van Der Veer? She was a very attractive woman, crowned Miss Kansas 1950. I thought that perhaps she was there at the pleasure of GTA or someone else. She was married to Frank Van Der Veer who won an Academy Award for Special Effects and he did many of the effects for the movie Star Wars. Velma passed away at the age of 79 in 2009. Lucy Martin was one of the pioneer faculty members. She was associated with the college for 50 years and passed away at age 98. She was a librarian, had worked at the Library of Congress before coming to AC. She studied at Julliard School of Music and taught music at AC. HWA appreciated her culture and love of music.

Leonardo said...

When I attended AC (1976-80) there were many faculty members who were not members of the WCG, although Lucy Martin had retired the year before I came out. She taught at AC for 28 years (1947-1975). Here's a short history of her:

http://www.glendorachurch.org/articles/founders-bio/in-memoriam-lucy-martin.htm

Velma Van Der Veer, now that's a name I've never heard of before.

Anonymous said...

My unsolicited advice to this James Scarborough: Hardcore Armstrongites should consider living like the Hutterites and Amish so that they are not tarnished by evolving and dynamic philosophical thoughts of the WCG remnants. Go to a place where there is no internet and maybe electricity (just use gas lights and gas refrigerators) and relive in isolation the glory days of WCG. But they should not forget to ban Meridith, Pack, and a host of ministerial suckers who bleed and milk members of their tithes and with their grandiose dreams of recreating Ambassador College buildings and vistas. Since we are talking here of a whole clan, male members can go out of the tribal territory to get wives, to return of course. But the females who marry outsiders should consider moving out of the tribal territory though keeping the kin relationship intact. For all you know, this is the place of safety and there is no need to purchase plane tickets to go to Petra. Don't forget to keep out from the premises Meredith, Pack, and the hosts of suckers and riders or else God would no longer accredit the community as a place of safety.

Michael said...

Velvet said: "I'm not 100% on that. (I give tithe of the tithe and Holy Day offerings during the feast to the Church in the UK.)"

Velvet, if you like, try this thought exercise some time. Go to a quiet place, close the door and sit down alone. Then ask yourself "If there is an omnipotent God with a plan, why is it that money is always involved. Not sometimes, always. Why am i sending in even one penny (or pence as the case may be) to these people, when God has access to an entire cosmos of resources? Why does the most important "work" going on in the entire universe, depend on whether I or others send in our bits of hard-earned cash to some organization? And if, perchance, it were nothing more than a group of men running a religious business with no God attached, how would it appear any differently than it does?"

Anonymous said...

There is one thing that doesn’t seem to be mentioned in discussions using scripture. Everything that has been recorded in the bible was written by real people at a real time in history. Not one word was directed at solving the problems of today. Even if it was inspired by God it was directed at specific people in an entirely different culture in a historical setting.

There may be principles that are universal, but it was originally recorded to be communicated to people in history. When we interpret it and try to apply it we cannot say that it was inspired for us unless we believe the Holy Spirit has been involve in our understanding. I believe many of the problems and difficulties could be resolved if people understood this.

Most of the problems are a matter of interpretation and forced application in a totally different culture and social life. If there is to be unity in a community every individual should understand the purpose and the reason the scripture applies to them. It cannot be just because it is in the bible if there isn’t just cause that applies to current conditions.

Leonardo said...

Anonymous 9:19 wrote: "There is one thing that doesn’t seem to be mentioned in discussions using scripture. Everything that has been recorded in the bible was written by real people at a real time in history. Not one word was directed at solving the problems of today. Even if it was inspired by God it was directed at specific people in an entirely different culture in a historical setting."

I agree, Anon. But that's a very nuanced, educated, reasonable view of the Bible as fine literature - yet one totally rejected by fundamentalists, who insist on seeing Scripture as, to use HWA's phrase, a revealed "practical instruction manual from the Creator to mankind" that is totally relevant to today's world and situation. Muslim's feel the very same way about their Quran. To take the principles contained in these ancient documents and apply them to modern circumstances requires interpretation, which opens the door to subjective personal opinions coming into the equation, which differ from person to person, or from group to group. And, of course, most everyone assumes their view to be the one TRUE view.

Inherent within religion is the seeds of controversy, division and, ultimately, violence. That's why, thankfully, the Founders of America, who were very well aware of history in general and religious history in particular, while acknowledging religion's influence upon the populace, essentially founded the nation as a secular one. Note that there is no mention of God or Jesus Christ in the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. This was done purposefully. They wanted to avoid so many of the theological problems that religious Europe had endured for centuries.

Secular-Humanist-Buddhist said...

I am trying to be understanding of the people who need the type of religion described by the person in the letter but, as an outsider, I must say the whole thing sounds delusional. Maybe I don't understand the lingo. What does being "marked" mean and why is it such a big deal? If someone "marked" me on the day of "atonement," I would go home and have a big ham sandwich and celebrate. Why do the COGs have such a mean god and why are they so all so angry and bitter? It's not a good way to be.

NO2RCM said...

Richard (Lake of Fire Church of God) said: "The work of God - preaching the gospel around the world as a witness - ended when Herbert W. Armstrong died."
Have to disagree here. Preaching the gospel around the world as a witness was never the work of God. Nowhere were we ever told to do that. What we were told to do was preach the gospel with a specific purpose, not just as a witness. The work of God is:
1) Turn non-believers into believers (John 6:29, Mark 16:16)
2) Make them disciples, that is, students and followers of the true Jesus Christ (Matt 28:19)
3) Preach repentance and remission of sins (Luke 24:47)
4) Baptize them (Matt 28:19, Mark 16:16)
5) Teach them what Jesus taught us (Matt 28:20), hopefully leading to
6) Salvation (Mark 16:16).

Preaching the gospel as a witness is for the lazy evangelist. It is nothing more than dropping fliers from an airplane, then sitting back and expecting God to send people to your church. It avoids the nitty-gritty work of helping people to change their lives. We should be like Paul, who put his life on the line. "I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some."

Oz said...

"My mother prepared literature from the days of Mr. Armstrong, which she tried to present as what we were once taught. The following Sabbath the minister, in his sermon, said you could have a whole stack of books and still be wrong."

Ain't that the truth??!!
Sadly these Armstrongists don't see the "plain truth" that by resorting to HWA's literature all the time to defend their so-called "Bible beliefs" they're acting no different to the Adventists and Mormons both of whom resort to White's publications or Smith's "Book of Mormon" respectively as if such were appendixes to the Bible itself!
The fact is they can't defend their beliefs from the Bible alone and so must resort to HWA's publications as if he was the Source of all Truth and has the final say on everything! Yet the Bible says that Christ Jesus is "the Truth" and His Word is "the Truth" (John 14:6; 17:17) not Armstrong, Meredith, Pack, Flurry or some other religious imposter.

Anon April 12, 8:11 said: "...I think they all came to realize that Gentiles were not obligated to observe the Law of Moses. Paul continued to observe many of them, which was his right. This does not prove that the NT church felt compelled to observed the Sabbath, Pentecost, etc, as HWA taught. In Acts 23:6 Paul described himself as a Pharisee (not a former Jew who became a Christian). Paul was a Messianic Jew or as some say, 'completed Jew', a Jew who accepted the Messiah Jesus. He continued (by choice) to observe his Jewish customs, but did not impose them onto the Church..."

I tend to agree with you there Anon. Look at Acts 18:18 and 21 for instance. Paul shaves his head in obedience to the Nazarite vow (Num 6) so he was still a faithful Jew. Later he tells the Ephesian Christians that he has to go to Jerusalem to observe Pentecost. So why (whether they were Jewish or Gentile or mixed) didn't Paul tell them (if they were supposed to) that they had to go with him to Jerusalem to keep the feast too? Does this mean that Christians (both Jews and Gentiles) kept the bible feasts, but locally (like the diaspora Jews)? Or does this mean that the Gentile Christians didn't have to keep any of the feasts at all except the Christian Passover? And if as HWA taught we were meant to observe the weekly and seasonal Sabbaths then what about the monthly new moon Sabbaths??!! It always struck me that this was somehow inconsistent (like so many other of his teachings)!

Head Usher said...

NO2RCM, one of the things I have come to realize about the COGs, is that they don't really want people to change.

If you're a new person, they'll want you to conform to the church's cultural norms. That means you'll need to cut your hair if you're a guy, invest in a suit and tie, stop eating pork and shellfish, start attending church on saturdays and holy days, stop cussing, etc. But once you've got all that conformity stuff down pat, learn to "speak the same thing," and become fully indoctrinated, which could take many years, then, you're supposed to eventually stop changing. Anything that doesn't stand out as being obviously wrong at this point, there will never be any pressure to change that.

If you were born in the church, you were raised up in conformity. This means that you learned early on how to break the rules and get away with it. As an adult, the church will NEVER want you to change. They want you to stay exactly the same as you already are. They will want you to keep thinking exactly the same thoughts over and over, just as you always have. For tithe sakes, do not think or do anything new!

Have you figured out how to beat your wife such that you don't leave any visible bruises? Well then, no problem. Have you figured out how to erase the traces of internet porn surfing from your computer? Well then, no problem. Have you figured out how to manage your problems with drugs and alcohol so that no one at church can tell? Well then, no problem. Have you figured out how to cheat on your wife and get away with it? Well then, no problem. You're doing just fine. Just so long as you can keep these things under wraps, then there's no need to change.

If you were to keep changing after you reached conformity by addressing your personal weaknesses, and begin figuring out how to turn areas of weakness into areas of strength; if you were to begin putting right your private faults, as a man of integrity, then you would begin to see all the problems with the church. You would begin to see all the sins that the culture of the church teaches people not to notice. Eventually, you would have to leave. Eventually, you would have to graduate from its kindergarten pablum and simplicity that you're not supposed to notice. In fact, your faith might even be destroyed in Herbert Armstrong, in the church he founded, and perhaps even in the god he professed.

Personal change, transformation, overcoming, or whatever you want to call it has NEVER been something the COGs have ever valued, for understandable reasons. The only thing they've ever valued was conformity, which is to say, transformation of the surface appearance to match cultural expectations. Addressing one's personal weaknesses was always beyond the scope of Armstrongism. As long as you learn how to keep a lid on your seedy private life, that's good enough.

Anonymous said...

HWA taught UNIFORMITY, not unity. They claim to observe the Law, but they only obey the ones they want. They don't require tassels on their clothing, destruction of dinnerware that comes in contact with anything unclean, they don't execute those who break the Sabbath, etc. They claim to keep the Law, but they don't and can't explain why. I don't keep the Law of Moses and can explain why I don't. With 613 OT laws, how do they choose which ones we must obey and which ones they can ignore? I never got a good answer from them.

Velvet said...

"Dave Pack is already dancing on LCG's grave:"

This does set Pack's tone in recent missives into context, doesn't it? Hmm.

Velvet said...

"What Pack seems not to realize is that ACOG brethren are mostly finished with the nonsense of moving from group to group. These days, when people leave their big group, most don't go to another big group, they become independents and fellowship with other independents."

And your statistics on that are where, exactly, Anonymous?

Velvet said...

"You could still become bitter in the future when it turns out that you will have to answer for your own behavior of carelessly giving "God's tenth" (not yours) to evil people."

I don't give carelessly, believe me; and the bulk of my second tithe goes where the Bible tells me to put it, NOT where the Church used to tell us to spend it.

As for whether or not I will be judged rightly or wrongly, I will wait until that day comes. Right now I proceed the best as I can see to proceed. Rather presumptuous of YOU to judge me, Anonymous.

Velvet said...

Michael,

Why is there money involved? It used to be there was money involved because money was what it took to support the Work. Why is there money involved now? I don't know. Our area is accumulating quite a bit, and every now and again, HQ will "skim" some from us, allegedly for some project or other. The rest of it just gathers.

What will be done with it in future? Only God knows.

The money I give to the Church in t he UK goes directly to the upkeep and maintenance of keeping the Feast sites (and their other works) going.

Velvet said...

"If you were born in the church, you were raised up in conformity. This means that you learned early on how to break the rules and get away with it."

I seem to have missed that Teen Study during my formative years; you sound like you would have been a joy to be around.

Velvet said...

" With 613 OT laws, "

That's Maimonides, NOT the Bible; and those accusing us of being "Jewish Christians" need to remember we NEVER took the Talmud as a sacred text (which Jewish people do, and is where they derive most of their good works from AJ Jacobs' "Year of Living Biblically" is instructive in this).

Leonardo said...

Head Usher wrote: "Personal change, transformation, overcoming, or whatever you want to call it has NEVER been something the COGs have ever valued, for understandable reasons. The only thing they've ever valued was conformity, which is to say, transformation of the surface appearance to match cultural expectations."

And that's why the current COG's are essentially at the same level of understanding they were 15, or 25, or 35 years ago – like fully-grown adults still passively sitting around, stuffed into the small desks in a 2nd grade classroom, proud of the basics they've learned so far, but not willing to develop any further than that. Virtually all the groups have a fixation fetish for Sabbath and Holy Day observance, clean and unclean meats, not keeping traditional holidays, etc. – but refuse to move on from there. This applies to the ministry as a whole as well as the membership. They seem perpetually stuck in an unending loop. Observe how many of the more fanatical groups keep emphasizing their intention of wanting to go back to what HWA taught in a more pure way – with Dave Pack (along with Flurry) even going so far as to try to re-create the old grounds of the Pasadena AC campus. These people are utterly incapable of thinking, let along thinking “outside the box” of the blind conformity they’ve grown so accustomed to.

I agree with you, Head Usher, regarding your insights on REAL personal change and transformation. The COG’s are completely unprepared to effectively promote such change even if they did want their members to grow beyond the ABC’s. But it’s obvious that they don’t want such transformation, as it would threaten the psychological stranglehold COG theology has on it's members minds. If they lose such “mind control” over the passive herb then the loss of money will be sure to follow.

Leonardo said...


Velvet wrote: "With 613 OT laws"...That's Maimonides, NOT the Bible."

Velvet, I'm afraid that IS the Bible. It was the third-century AD teacher Rabbi Simlai who originally counted the 613 mitzvot ("commandments") directly from the Old Testament, NOT Maimonides, who lived about a thousand years after Rabbi Simlai.

Your knowledge of basic theology is astonishingly shallow. Perhaps if you read more and blogged less your well of real knowledge would deepen. As it is you state far more personal shoot-from-the-hip opinions than actual knowledge, and routinely make such crazy statements on so regular a basis such that your creditability here is eroding away very rapidly.

Remember, "Whoever loves instruction loves knowledge, but he who hates correction is stupid." (Prov. 12:1)

Anonymous said...

Velvet: with regards to your comment on my comment. The 613 commandments (Hebrew: תרי"ג מצוות‎: taryag mitzvot, "613 Mitzvot") is the number of mitzvot listed in the Torah, first codified by Rabbi Simlai in Talmud Makkot 23b.

Anonymous said...

Again, HWA claims that the true Church of God keeps the Law of God, but they don't keep ALL of them. James 2:10 says that it a package deal, you can't "pick any fifty out of 613."
I remember HWA saying at AC (71-73) about men having long hair. He asked, why would a man want to look like a girl? Remember? I might ask, "Why would YOU want to shave your face smooth and look like a woman?" Trimming beards is another one of those pesky 613 laws that is prohibited Lev 19:27. I have never known a group that was so arrogant about their knowledge of The Truth, yet were so poorly educated. An AC degree doesn't indicate education, but indoctrination. Can you imagine raising your hand in RCM's First Year Bible class as asking some challenging questions? You would be accused of "having a bad attitude."

Leonardo said...

Anon, HWA very much disliked facial hair on men. That's why so few ministers ever had mustaches or beards back in the day. HWA did what many do: they cherry-pick scriptures, and wrongly attribute to God what in the final analysis is simply their own subjective opinions.

You summed it up quite concisely when you said "I have never known a group that was so arrogant about their knowledge of The Truth, yet were so poorly educated."

NO2RCM said...

"HWA taught UNIFORMITY, not unity."
HWA didn't just teach uniformity, he enforced it. Meredith, Flurry, Pack, & Hulme would love to have that power today. Every move these men take is intended to increase their own power and control, but they have a real dilemma. They can't clamp down too tightly or people will leave. They can't allow outspoken "rebels" like Baca or Scarborough or else their whole power structure collapses. So they engage in a balancing act, doing whatever is necessary to increase their own power, or at least preserve it.
Notice what's missing here? Following Jesus Christ and serving His people. Doing the right thing and letting God take care of the rest. These men practice uniformity by coercion and peer pressure. What God really wants is unity by choice. That we choose to be together in spite of our differences.

Head Usher said...

"These men practice uniformity by coercion and peer pressure."

You can say that again. There is so much pressure and reinforcement of the party line, not just by head honchos, but by everyone you talk to. If you say something that doesn't quite align with the party line, you'll get no end of probing questions, "but did you really mean...?" There is no room for personal honesty. There is only room for you to be the yellow pencil the organization needs you to be.

Anonymous said...

"If you were born in the church, you were raised up in conformity. This means that you learned early on how to break the rules and get away with it."

If one had any brains, yes. The others seemed to just languish in their parents' homes whining on about "the world", tho they seemed to know very little about it.

Leonardo said...

Head Usher wrote: "There is so much pressure and reinforcement of the party line, not just by head honchos, but by everyone you talk to."

Yes, Group Think. I've found that talking to the vast majority of present-day COG members (as many of my social acquaintances are) can quite accurately be compared to talking with those representing the political far left. They both can't really think much beyond the politically-correct "talking points" they’ve been taught by their handlers. But get beyond such talking points, and most of them I've ever seriously confronted are in deep trouble. For all they can then do is pretty much just repeat the same slogans over and over. I refer to this sad phenomenon as intellectual incest – where people are just so used to being around others who passively hold to the same unquestioned and unexamined views as they do, such that few new ideas are rarely if ever introduced into their minds. Just like folks whose family tree looks more like a two-pronged fork rather than a bushy maple tree. Incest, whether physical or intellectual, results is damaged “genetics” and a host of other problems down the line.

That’s why it’s so vitally important to read widely, and listen to others (either in person, on-line, or via videos, etc.) who have different views than ones own. You can learn so much from this mental habit, either by becoming familiar with other views, adopting from the best of them to be your own, or by having your own views subsequently reinforced. But those who hide trembling in their safe religious caves go nowhere. And I’m afraid this describes, at least in principle, so many COGers nowadays, and explains why they are so gullible and such easy targets for the crazy rhetoric of folks like Rod Meredith, Dave Pack, Ron Weinland, etc., and why so many of them jump from one guru to the next, as we are seeing a lot of right now.

Byker Bob said...

Over the past 13 years on these forums and blogs, I've become aware of numerous subsets of ex-COG people amongst the believer, non-believer, and allegedly still stalwart categories.

One such subset is composed of people who believe that applying the most Jewish possible interpretations to the life of Jesus Christ provides the best understanding, and highest level of truth.

We've all been exposed to the "one God" people, who believe that Jesus could not have pre-existed with Father God, but was a created being who became the first "saved". Then, there are the "holy name" people who believe that prayers will not be answered unless one uses the proper Hebrew names for God. We have people who teach that the New Covenant and the Old Covenant are identical, with the exception that the Jesus experience has become a limited part of the New. Some believe that Jesus was a totally Jewish phenomenon, and never saw Himself as making any changes to Sinai law, only an explainer of the intent behind it. Certainly not the originator of a new "religion".

Some see Luke (written by Paul's close associate, who is seen as an apologist by some) as being less reliable than the other gospels, and tend to see the book of Acts in somewhat the same light. And, they don't know what to do with Paul. Some write him off as a cypher of Simon Magus, while others make futile and unconvincing attempts to harmonize his teachings with the Old Testament, and with the Jewish part of the history of the early church.

This is all a construct. Someone has set standards by which to evaluate, and deeper experiences and understanding are presumed not to occur with time. IOW, the system of beliefs is always dead and frozen within a particular snapshot in time. Static, not dynamic.

That HWA froze the gospel at one point in time, and failed to pick up on the examples provided by the apostles that mainstream Christianity takes much of its cue from, is very telling. One of the axioms of Armstrongism is borrowed from Josephus, who frequently used the phrase "who made no innovations" describing leaders he saw as being righteous. In fact, "returning to the faith once delivered" is somewhat of a paraphrase of this axiom.

Other cults have their own constructs, and they are not seen for what they really are by insiders in those groups. In some cases, constructs severely limit growth or greater understanding, yet the reality is that insiders believe they accomplish exactly the opposite.

In 1975, I decided that I had received so much disinformation and error from WCG that the only intelligent thing to do was to trust noone, and to walk away from the whole thing, possibly revisiting it all later in life from a new perspective. I wouldn't recommend to ACOG members that they abandon belief, but I would point out that there is not a single teacher in their midst who can be trusted. They also need to quit mentally substituting HWA for Jesus Christ, and visualizing Father God as HWA on steroids.

BB

Anonymous said...

Byker Bob you make a lot of sense and speak the truth. In summary, COGS, JWs and the like are cults, perhaps even worse. They have distorted and skipped past many parts of the NT to justify their false doctrines and beliefs. How can anyone in all honesty believe any one of them is the true church each one claims to be? Of course the simple answer is one can't justify any one of them is the true church. That's why I consider them all synagogues of Satan. Perhaps I'm too extreme in that point but given all the evidence I don't think it's too unreasonable at least to take under consideration they may be.

Leonardo said...

You amaze me, Anon, you're "explanation" to virtually everything you encounter is that they are all "synagogues of Satan." I realize it appears in Revelation 3, but what exactly IS a synagogue of Satan? Can you give me an intelligible working definition of the term?

Secular-Humanist-Buddhist said...

Byker Bob said "I wouldn't recommend to ACOG members that they abandon belief"
I would recommed they abandon them! There are much kinder religions and belief systems out there. The COG "god" is downright mean and punitive and the church teaches the same kind of authoritarianiss and abuse of the children, who have no choice but to be there. You don't f**cking spank babies and todlers because they do what babies and todlers do. You don't make childre sit quietly in meaningless 2 hour sermons. These people are crazy and cruel to boot.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous April 12, 2013 at 5:58 AM said: " I Cor 15:2-5 The Good News is that Christ died for our sins . . . " "

sadly this is the scripture that got Dr. M going back in about 2006. If you were to read the context of the scripture instead of just taking one verse, you will notice that Paul continues the thought clear to the ressurection and beyond where he states in V 24"Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power."

Someone would have to ask themselves where the kingdom is referenced to in v 1-5 of the chapter. he said "Christ died for our sins." Chris was not his name it was his title, savior, king, whatever, it inferred the kingdom. Some like to state that because of Paul preaching Christ and him crucified, that Paul spoke only of Jesus, that is really rather a false assumption. He preached Messiah and him crucified. That is why it would be a stumbling block to the Jews, the Messiah was to set up the kingdom not die. The to Greeks foolishness, because they would think, what kind of savior saves you by dying?

Anyway, we love to tell people to read in context when it matters to us. Read the whole of chapter 15 looking at the transitional phrases, such as; "and", "then," etc. Amazing when you look at the context and not from just a limited view. There is no way that the gospel does not include Jesus Christ, he is to be the king of that kingdom that he preached about. Read your Bible man.

Leonardo said...

"Read your Bible man."

I did, very diligently and with great intensity for 38 years. That's WHY I don't read it that much anymore, at least as an instruction manual from an invisible god. Way too much craziness there, I'm afraid. That's why you Christians can never agree as to what a particular passage of Scripture even means, because it's so contradictory. Just read the various arguments here that arise all the time, discussing all manner of doctrines. Every one seems to have a different interpretation and few of them can seem to agree on any one thing. It's really quite a hoot for the rest of us to watch.

Anonymous said...

Response to Leonardo:

I agree that you see a lot of contradiction. That can be limited but never really eliminated. I remember being in a forum where people were discussing a couple of the parables of Jesus where they were trying to interpret what was being said. I was like listening to the Life of Brian: "...bless the cheese makers...? No, he must mean every maker of dairy product."

Not matter how much someone attempted to mention that the parables were parables, they kept coming up with some crazy applications that might get them in trouble some day.

Leonardo said...

Secular-Humanist-Buddhist wrote: "Byker Bob said "I wouldn't recommend to ACOG members that they abandon belief." I would recommend they abandon them! There are much kinder religions and belief systems out there."

Good advice, Secular. But like Voltaire said "It is hard to free fools from chains they revere."

Notice that whenever I ask one of them to specifically define a term or slogan they are so famous for throwing so freely about, they almost NEVER respond. Why do you think this is? Because most ardent Bible-beleiving Christians have no idea what they are talking about 99% of the time. It's almost ALL verbal bluster but no substance. That's why they will virtually never engage in any kind of serious discussion here with respect to their beliefs. Oh yes, they'll quote a scripture here, blurt out a slogan there, ridicule the non-believers when they can, but notice that such are almost never able to articulate anything meaningful or intelligible. To me that fact alone tells us a lot about the low level of intelligence most of these folks have.

“Of all nonsense, religious nonsense is the most nonsensical.” Robert Burns

Anonymous said...

In reading the many comments I sincerely recognize that each contributor is speaking from experience, but everyone is speaking from one view of their whole life experience. This one view is just a small portion of their whole life experience. If the advice given doesn’t have other facts about a person’s life its value or acceptance is questionable.

In dealing with the more radical religious groups it is very difficult for people to reconnect when the relationship is broken. It is also difficult to abandon some of the beliefs associated with their interpretation of scripture so they search for like minded churches or groups. I guess in groups like this the goal isn’t to solve the particular problem or predicament, but to provide a forum for others to offer their opinion or the solution they found acceptable.

BTW: I vaguely remember the Scarborough family name back when we started attending a WCG congregation. It seems to have grown to the point they could have their own family church. That is very common in Kentucky where my wife’s family lives, of course they oneness Apostolic Church of God so we don’t try to reconnect through them.
AB

Redfox712 said...

So the Scarboroughs believe it is wrong to focus on Jesus. Honestly I find myself unsure what to make of this claim. It is like he wishes to fulfil what ex-COG people are saying in that Armstrongites cannot stand to hear the name Jesus.

"we noticed after Mr. Bryce left LCG that a new focus on Jesus Christ began to emerge."

When I got sucked into LCG I always thought I was being faithful to Jesus by giving my allegiance to LCG.

"Much to our surprise he went into another sermon about Jesus Christ; not Pentecost."

A preacher talking about Jesus and not about HWA's interpretation of Pentecost. HWA taught that Pentecost symbolized the first fruits. What would be so wrong about talking about the man who harvested these first fruits.

HWA taught (inaccurately) that the false church focused on the person of Jesus and grace in order to abolish observance of the seventh day Sabbath and observance of other Jewish practices (HWA only observed the ones he agreed with). HWA devised this slogan in order to claim that he was the bearer of the true church and to justify Sabbath keeping and observances of Jewish ritual most Christians do not observe. HWA also taught this in order to make prospective members refuse to attend any other church, most of which are proud to associate themselves with the name of Jesus and proudly teach grace.

The real purpose of this idea of HWA's is to separate COG followers from other Christians so that they would have to follow HWA and pay him three tithes.

(HWA was also a shameless liar. In Mystery of the Ages he claimed there was a dark age within the church that lasted AD 50-150. Paul did most of his work during this time. How can that be considered a dark age? Turns out he wanted to date the supposed suppression of the true gospel to AD 53 with the writing of Galatians and then claim the broadcast of Radio Luxembourg in 1953 symbolized the end of 1900 years of suppression of the true gospel. What poppycock.)

"On December 25th 2010 we heard a sermon, by the local minister, titled “In the Name of Jesus Christ”."

I recall that Meredith stated that one of the keys to answered prayer was to pray "in the name of Jesus Christ". This was long before Bryce's departure.

"My sister Glenda was fired by LCG the day before Atonement last year just because she was sending out sermons, which was her job. LCG did not like that some of the sermons were given by Mr. Carl McNair, and Mr. John Ogwyn, and the fact some messages disagreed with LCG’s new teaching. ... Mr. Meredith also told her in this meeting that she, and her entire Scarborough family, are liars."

Meredith is a shameless liar. In many of his telecasts he will often say that the information you are receiving on this program cannot be found anywhere else. He is lying every time he says that. He well knows there are many COGs and other TV programs that teach what Meredith does. There are a few distinctive differences but they teach mostly the same things. I hear on at least one TV station Tomorrow's World is immediately followed by another COG TV program. What must the viewer think of Meredith after seeing him lie so blatantly?

I will also say that John Ogwyn was also a shameless liar. Back in 2000 he wrote that HWA foresaw the fall of the Iron Curtain in the 1950s. What he didn't say was that HWA actually believed that Jesus Christ would return in 1975, that the Soviet Union would outlast the USA and only be dissolved several years after Jesus Christ's return. Anyone who wishes to depend on him will fall into trouble.

NO2RCM said...

Scarborough, Redfox712, and Thiel all state that Charles Bryce "left" LCG? Are you kidding? You guys have been so deeply brainwashed by your time with Meredith that you forget that he was violently booted out. Don't you remember that all he did was write a private letter to the LCG evangelists about his concerns? Next thing you know, he is fired, disfellowshipped, publicly humiliated, and is accused by Winnail of consorting with Satan. Meredith has an extraordinary ability to embed propaganda and everyone who has ever been associated with LCG needs to examine everything you learned from Meredith.

Anonymous said...

I think its ironic how church leaders will claim they're booting someone out for their own good, when in fact they're trying to staunch the flow of ideas they consider a threat to their ability to continue to control members. They're doing it for the good of their own bank account. Yet, in another ironic twist, even though they do it for their own selfish interests, there is nothing more beneficial that they could possibly do for anyone than to boot them out. However the public humiliation isn't so great.

Let us pray: "Oh god, please let the gates of hell prevail against all the many and assorted one true churches of you. AMEN!"

Velvet said...

"first codified by Rabbi Simlai in Talmud Makkot 23b."

Anon, you've proven my point; you just stated "the 613 commandments" are extra-Biblical. And I can tell you, having grown up in the Church, there were NO "613 commandments" preached, nor did we consider the Talmud to be an authoritative text.

Velvet said...

"That's why so few ministers ever had mustaches or beards back in the day."

That was changed by the time I was growing up; there was never an issue with beards on members or ministers, in any of the congregations I attended. Some men grew them, some men didn't. I don't ever recall hearing from the pulpit that it was forbidden, nor do I recall anyone saying it was.

The pastor of the Victoria congregation during the 1980s had a mustache.

If you check the yearbook pictures in the PT's Ministerial Hall of Shame, you'll see a significant percentage of facial hair, actually.

Velvet said...

"You amaze me, Anon, you're "explanation" to virtually everything you encounter is that they are all "synagogues of Satan."

Don't feed the trolls, Leo.

Velvet said...

Acts 19:8
And he went into the synagogue and spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God.

Acts 20:25
“And indeed, now I know that you all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more.

Acts 28:23
So when they had appointed him a day, many came to him at his lodging, to whom he explained and solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets, from morning till evening.

Acts 28:31
preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no one forbidding him.

Plus the multitude of verses where Jesus himself preaches the gospel of the Kingdom of God; the parables of the mustard seed, the leaven of the Pharisees and the parable of the talents, in particular, and several points where Jesus sends His disciples to preach the gospel of the Kingdom of God.

Velvet said...

"It is like he wishes to fulfil what ex-COG people are saying in that Armstrongites cannot stand to hear the name Jesus."

Perhaps they've been taken in by the Evangelical ministers in the Church who have been posing (falsely) as "faithful" to the old teachings, simultaneously spoon-feeding untrue pap like this to them.

The Evangelicals in the Church talk around Jesus; we heard far more about the real, living, resurrected Jesus, and what He actually SAID and DID, in the Church BEFORE the changes, than I hear currently being preached; unless it's the empty "mystery-Jesus-idol" type.

Anonymous said...

I think what people who have stayed in the CoGs are concerned with if they think of the older teachings is the emphasis on Jesus alone. Jr. and the gang emphasized Jesus alone and look at the havoc they put upon the membership, is that what the God of love would do?

These guys preach all kinds of "love" but dont have the fruits of it. Jesus came and preached the good news of the kingdom of God and he came to reveal the Father. When these individuals have sermons on him alone, they leave the Father out, almost all the time it seems.

Jesus is the king of that kingdom he preached. To say that even HWA did not preach about Jesus is pure falsehood. Who was it that came into Galilee preaching the gospel of the kingdom? It was Jesus. So even the juxtaposition against HWA versus those who preach Jesus only, is pretty bizarre.

How can one not preach Jesus at Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread when we say, Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. He took the bread and brake it. I mean really, the FOT, Trumpets, Atonement, Christ returns, Jesus Christ is responsible for binding and banishing Satan, Jesus Christ, starts the kingdom of God on Earth, and on and on. Maybe those preaching Jesus only left him out of messages, I cannot believe that he was left out of our overall message all these years, it is pure falsehood to say so.

The issue is the emphasis on Jesus only, to the point that you hear about some syrupy form of love without even the I Cor 13 definition of love or that God is love, or that if you love me keep my commandments. Jr. preached love and then had a vendetta against anyone that was holding fast.

This is where the problem is and where these guys in UCG, LCG and others are taking things.

Anonymous said...

Christianity is all a grand conspiracy. The phony gospels, the fake epistles, the pagan popes, the money-hungry sex-crazed TV evangelists, the crooked COGs. And all that was based on the OT conspiracy started by Moses--the fake religion of Judaism--another conspiracy. It's one conspiracy on top of another, and still, billions of people don't see that. But if you want to talk about conspiracy "theories" then you're considered by many a nutcase and a crackpot. Even people on here who should know better. Why, how could there be conspiracies? How could they get away with it? Duh. Well, they do, because people are in denial. So there.

Hated "crackpot".

Anonymous said...

Regarding the "facial hair" question: I do not know of WCG making any pronouncements on it whatsoever (outside of a general emphasis on conservative dress), but it's possible they did prior to the mid-60s or so, when their demands for adherence to "God's LAW" were a little more strict. Or it could just be an associated practice of imitation - HWA didn't sport facial hair and combed his hair straight back, and you see some of the older HQ muckety-mucks styling themselves in the same "fashion" throughout the years.

(On that note, I also find the pronouncements of come-latelys like Stephen Flurry in the vein of "Mr. Armstrong NEVER SAID ______" to be debatable, because some of the strongest comments from HWA and Co were often in the co-worker letters and periodicals, not so much in the books and booklets. Being that said letters and periodicals are harder to come by than the literature itself, its no surprise that the newer crop doesn't know about some of the crazier things WCG prescribed in days past.

As for the Scarboroughs... ick, I don't know. I don't quite understand where they're coming from. Sure, if they were worried that someone was preaching a different doctrine than they were supposed to be getting in LCG, sure, contact HQ and make sure everybody's in step. The haranguing about how they supported RCM while he was doing X Y and Z and how they won't meet them as a family and yadda yadda strikes me as a little weird. And reading between the lines I get the impression they kicked up quite a bit of fanfare over their "disassociation" with LCG, so why cry about petty ministers making comments about it?

Well, I guess that's Armstrongism for ya.

Anonymous said...

Acceptable 'side burn length' was preached from the pulpit in the (HWA-Era) WCG, as well as 'skirt lengths'.

Both were measured to the fraction of an inch.

Anonymous said...

Skirt lengths and hair lengths (men) i remember. dont remember sideburns, but I would have been very young when that was in fashion.

Velvet said...

"Jr. and the gang emphasized Jesus alone and look at the havoc they put upon the membership, is that what the God of love would do?"

Yep, that's the crux of the problem, I agree. Which, from where I'm sitting, the "denominational leadership" has turned the Church AWAY from Jesus, the Jesus the Church did preach the teachings of, and to be honest, they haven't really "replaced" it with anything more than mumbo-jumbo "theology" you need a high-priced dictionary to even decipher (good luck understanding it; it all meets the definition of "inane babblings" pretty spot-on, in my opinion).

"When these individuals have sermons on him alone, they leave the Father out, almost all the time it seems."

And the splinter groups err too far in the other direction. So, where''s the happy medium? Not being preached in any group at all, right now, as far as I can see. But there is the point made in one of John's letters, that Jesus has come to teach His people Himself.....

"To say that even HWA did not preach about Jesus is pure falsehood. Who was it that came into Galilee preaching the gospel of the kingdom? It was Jesus. So even the juxtaposition against HWA versus those who preach Jesus only, is pretty bizarre."

That's what I've been saying ever since I was called back to the Church, Anon, but it is NOT what Junior and his Evangelicals want to hear; as far as they're concerned, they want the world to think the Church never even spoke about Jesus at all; whereas you would be hard-pressed, in any of those sound-bite-length videos, to find ANY of the yahoos pontificating on the American website, saying much about Jesus at all, beyond "He died! He's dead! We killed Him! Isn't it great that we're all saved from the imaginary hell because our Lord and Saviour and Messiah is DEAD????"

As opposed to what the Church taught when I was growing up, namely that the RESURRECTED Christ was (and is) our present, real, and living Saviour and Lord, and that we are to follow the LIVING Christ; not the dead guy on a stake the Evangelicals can't seem to stop being "hung" up on.......

Velvet said...

"Being that said letters and periodicals are harder to come by than the literature itself,"

Letters 1934 - 1986 (Searchable text) (Warning: Large PDF.)

Indexed Plain Truth archive, searchable from the box in the middle of the page.

Good News, also searchable.

Robert Taylor's site even has the relatively short-lived Tomorrow's World magazine.

If you want to go further back, here's the Bulletin, AND the PGR.

If you're looking for the various administration forms, manuals, and other ministerial materials that none of us ever got to see, head over to Friends of the Sabbath for the rest; between these two sites, the bulk of the original material seems to have been preserved.

The only more complete archive would be the alleged warehouse in Glendora that (again, allegedly) has everything ever printed by the Church; but I find it hard to believe Junior and friends didn't torch all that when they had the first opportunity to do so.

Velvet said...

I remember skirt lengths and hair length as well, when I was growing up. Never heard diddly about beards and/or sideburns.

Anonymous said...

Bear in mind, other side of the coin were the members who, either worrying about what said mucketymucks would think, or maybe using the minister as a complaint form about someone else, went and asked their ministers about "appropriate" lengths and degrees of this and that. Which likely created a bunch of regional and local byrules.

Velvet said...

"Which likely created a bunch of regional and local byrules."

I'm inclined to agree with Anonymous, that explanation actually makes sense.

Anonymous said...

Thats assuming the regional/local pastors werent cp trpl freaks and didnt go around inventing rules of their own. Which some did, I know.

Anonymous said...

Wait. People are upset because more emphasis is being put on Jesus? They're leaving their congregation because of that?

Gideon said...

There's one constant reflected by J. Scarborough's missive. The churches of God track record continues! Split/ splinter/ fragment/ disintergrate/ schism etc. Same pattern adinfinitum: someone, Scarborough this case. Decides heor she, knows better and MAYBE [God only knows] THEY DO?! There's the physchological/ spiritual 'agy bargy.'Meetings,pulpit innuendos, authority enforced. Exit voluntarilly or via disfellowshipment and another Church of God is born! Or small church groups, leaderless + 'lost' meet in homes. Armstrong left CoG7thDay + they'd came from somewhere else. WCG fragmented, spawning 100's of sects thereof, this is the state of play for these particular churches of God. CoG7thDay has avoided this trend/ pattern. Bible warns[ed] us this would + is happening. God's Church is described as numerically "small."

Gideon said...

Pattern or track record of fragmentation has been? is the satus quo for these particularChurches of God

Gideon said...

Fragmentation into new churches is b the historical track record of these churches of God.The same pattern of member disagreement with ministry teachings, gossipp,letters/etc, disfellowshipment or volutary exit continues!Armstrong started it from the CoG7thDay + it continues; will till Christ returns! However it really began after Christ + the apostles' deaths: prophesied, along with the reality of God's Church being numerically small.

old EXPCG hag said...


Secular-Humanist-Buddhist said...

I am trying to be understanding of the people who need the type of religion described by the person in the letter but, as an outsider, I must say the whole thing sounds delusional. Maybe I don't understand the lingo. What does being "marked" mean and why is it such a big deal? If someone "marked" me on the day of "atonement," I would go home and have a big ham sandwich and celebrate. Why do the COGs have such a mean god and why are they so all so angry and bitter? It's not a good way to be.
April 12, 2013 at 11:03 P.M.

>HA!< Good One!

Mason said...

My name is Steven Mason Smith JR and i go by Mason (just in case im so lucky enough to be marked by Merideth over a must play) I did not read all the post but just to yell this out to the Scarboough family they did the same thing in world wide!!! Prove it from your Bible not Armstrong!!!!