All My Yesterdays

Dear readers, first I would like to take a moment to express my deepest appreciation to you for your visiting, commenting, and even supporting this blog. I welcome all of you, whether you agree with me (in whole or in part) or not. You've come from all over the globe - Italy, China, Australia, Chile, South Africa, to name a few... all to my little corner of the Internet. I am humbled, I am without the proper words to express my gratitude, I am encouraged, I am hopeful. Thank you! I mean that.

What I would like to share with you today is a letter from a couple (Bob and Connie) who were seeking many of the things I have so very recently sought (and so have many others, including many of you). This letter was written in 1974-75 and is addressed to a minister of the Worldwide Church of God by the name of Hunting. What I found most striking about the letter was the similarity between the author's own search and mine. In more than one place the author's comments were virtually identical to some I have made. The questions, the search, the frustration, the areas investigated, the order of the process, the conclusions, all eerily similar to my own... and here that was 35 years ago. It was as if this person reached forward in time into my thoughts in the present day and pulled them back to record them in his own words. I get the feeling as if this letter was written for me.

I honestly believe this one letter summarizes every COG splinter group, indeed even the entire history of what I call "Armstrongism" itself.

I am going to quote from that letter, and there are so very many things I believe must be quoted (all emphasis mine) - things that touch deep in my soul and speak immeasurably to what I felt and thought and wrestled with for the past year as I came to realize God was lifting me out of Armstrongism. Please read these along with me and share in these vital new ideas recorded so long ago.

"Both Paul and Herbert W. Armstrong have said 'Follow me as I follow Christ,' or in other words 'as I follow the Bible.' Yet these words are rendered empty and meaningless when we are told we must leave certain decisions up to 'the church,' and that if we don't think a decision constitutes 'following Christ,' we must abide by it anyway, since 'it is 'the church's' responsibility.'"

"...this attitude is a large part of what is wrong with the Worldwide Church of God. Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong (and, I think, much of the ministry) looks at the members as poor, dumb sheep; innocent, helpless, babes who must be sheltered, spoon-fed, kept in the dark, told nothing, never consulted, and guarded strictly lest they fall helplessly away or are defenselessly led astray. This is the way the Catholic Church looked at and treated its laity during the Dark Ages."

"Before an individual becomes a member of the Worldwide Church of God, he is encouraged 'to prove all things, hold fast that which is true.' The ministry tells him, 'Don't believe what we say -- check it out.' 'If we teach contrary to God's Word, do not follow us.' Etc. Unfortunately, the opposite process begins once one is in the Worldwide Church of God. The member is told that 'Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong is closer to God and has more of His Holy Spirit than anyone else, which is the reason he is the leader of the Church' or 'Since Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong is the leader of God's Church, he must be closer to God and have more of His Holy Spirit than anyone else.' Therefore his opinions (re: scriptural or non-scriptural matters) are more godly than anyone else's can be, so to do as he says must be the course of action which most pleases God. This type of circular reasoning is taught to the members, and is applied to a lesser degree to Mr. Garner Ted Armstrong, then the evangelists, then the pastors, then the preaching elders, etc., etc. By the time you get to the lowly lay member, his opinion is worthless, when compared with the hundreds of those who must be closer to God since they have higher positions, or who have higher positions since they are closer to God. In this way the member is stripped of any confidence in himself or God's Spirit in him. He places Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong and the rest of the ministry in the position of defining what he must believe -- in place of Jesus Christ and the Bible. The ministry carefully shows the lay members how to prove the beliefs of the Worldwide Church of God from the Bible. The member thinks his belief is firmly grounded in the Bible, but for him to prove it he must rely heavily on the proof-texts and the explanations he has been given."

"The approach of the Worldwide Church of God indicates that the lay member needs the Holy Spirit only to help him overcome 'personal problems' and help him accept that which the ministry tells him the Bible says. The Holy Spirit isn't simply to help us agree with the way the Worldwide Church of God explains it. In this way, the 'weak of the world' are being made weaker. It doesn't take a spiritually strong person to merely accept exactly what the Worldwide Church of God teaches and to obey it strictly. But it does require strength of character and spirit to question, research, prove, and then abide by your convictions, regardless of what the Worldwide Church of God or anyone else says.

In this way I think the members of the Worldwide Church of God are not being helped. They know what they believe and how to 'prove' it. If there is a doctrinal change they are then taught what new thing they should believe and how to 'prove' it."

"[HWA] called our Divorce & Remarriage change 'new light,' 'new truth' which God has (finally) shown us. In other words, he subtly blamed our doctrinal error on God. He never once admitted that he had simply been wrong. He never apologized to all the people whose lives and marriages he had ruined. He gave God all the credit for wrecking and destroying thousands of families."

"Another quote from the [May 14, 1974 Letter to the Brethren]: "Brethren, this very experience (the Divorce & Remarriage change) ought to teach all that loyalty to God and to His Church must always be placed first, over supposed or real wrongs or personal grievances." Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong is saying loyalty to the Worldwide Church of God must be placed above loyalty to God's Word! He's saying that it was right for us to obey the Worldwide Church of God's unbiblical and anti-scriptural teaching on Divorce & Remarriage all these years, because this is what he terms "loyalty to God's Church." And he says this loyalty must "always be placed first, over supposed or real wrongs or personal grievances." In other words, loyalty to the dictates of an organization must be placed first over what the Bible really teaches..."

"Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong goes on to say...'God has given those of us who are loyal to Him and His Word the relief we relied on Him to give us.' In actual fact, the "relief" has been there for 2,000 years, but it has taken the Worldwide Church of God this long to discover and accept it. And those who were 'loyal to Him and His Word' on the subject of Divorce & Remarriage needed no relief since they refused to ever submit to the Worldwide Church of God's incorrect teaching in the first place. Yet Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong would consider those who ten years ago refused to obey the Worldwide Church of God's teachings on Divorce & Remarriage, Pentecost, etc. to be disloyal, even though they were being loyal to what God said in His Word."

"Then Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong tells how much he and the other ministers appreciate 'the faithfulness of those of you who have endured this anguish in order to be obedient to our God.' Actually, they were obedient to Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God rather than God Anytime we obey men rather than God, He is not pleased, regardless of the sincerity of the individuals involved. Mr. Hunting, is it ever right to obey Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong rather than the Eternal? Yet Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong commends the brethren for doing exactly that, and then labels it faith in and obedience to God."

"When I first began attending the Radio Church of God, I was told this was the true church because we did and taught exactly what the Bible said. Recently the Worldwide Church of God has said we're the true church because we change our teachings when they are wrong."

"...there is no such thing as one True Church the way the Worldwide Church of God believes there is -- in other words there is not one true organization."

"The one true Church of God certainly does exist, but it has no organizational boundaries. The definition of a Christian, one who is a part of the body of Christ, a member of the Church of God is one who has God's Holy Spirit in him (Rom. 8:9)."

"I came to realize that simply taking the word of Mr. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God would displease God. I would be placing them above Him and His Word as the primary molders of my beliefs."

"I perhaps reached the depth of my disappointment with the Worldwide Church of God when I read a statement written by Mr. Armstrong appearing on page 631 of the December 3, 1974, Bulletin. It's implications are horrendous. He said, 'Christ has BOUND in heaven what His Church, even in unrealized error, has bound in earth.' The statement hit me like a lightning bolt."

"The Worldwide Church of God cannot afford to openly present both sides of the story, cannot allow its members to read the opinions of those who disagree with Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong and the official stand of 'the church.' ... This is why disfellowshipment is such a handy tool for them. New, unapproved, 'heretical' ideas and opinions can be stopped by kicking the trouble-maker out of 'the church' and then forbidding anyone in 'the church' from talking with him."

"...whenever someone who used to be a loyal supporter and member of the Worldwide Church of God begins to believe and teach something different, Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong declares them to be 'in the bonds of Satan.' ... the Pharisees accused Jesus of acting 'by Beelzebub the prince of the devils,' although Jesus said His actions were 'by the Spirit of God.' If God through His Holy Spirit is motivating and guiding certain individuals, He will not look lightly on accusers who claim the Spirit-led individuals are actually motivated by and in the bonds of Satan."

"I vividly remember attending, in my freshman year, Pasadena Bible Studies conducted by Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong. He was always getting upset at people who sent up questions during the Bible Study. If any question expressed even slight disagreement with him, what he had said, a belief of the Worldwide Church of God, etc., Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong became very irate. He would scold the questioner for 'his attitude,' his lack of respect, disloyalty, and so on. [Where have I seen that before?] Mr. Hunting, I'm not exaggerating. He made it quite clear he does not want to be questioned. He was very defensive and constantly felt the questions to be a challenge to his authority." [Excatly as John Keisz said!]

"Being a student at Ambassador College, and to a lesser extent a lay member in the Worldwide Church of God, is to experience a type of brainwashing. The indoctrination results in a form of mental castration; theologically the individual will not or cannot think for himself. He will blindly accept, believe, and obey whatever Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong says. He will loyally support and uphold the Worldwide Church of God's castigation of those who question, doubt, or criticize."

"I've read Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong’s booklet, What is the True Gospel.  He only quotes five or six of the New Testament scriptures which mention 'gospel.' Three or four of the quotes serve as his 'proof-texts' -- and he proceeds to draw dogmatic conclusions, ignoring both the immediate context and the rest of the New Testament. If he'd examine the other 95 places where 'gospel' is mentioned, the meaning would be quite clear, although very different. This booklet is typical of the research and 'open-mindedness' which has gone into most Worldwide Church of God publications and conclusions. Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong’s concept of the gospel is similar to the blind man who got hold of the elephant's tail and quickly concluded that an elephant resembled a piece of rope."

"I hope you will look at what Mr. Armstrong writes and says about 'the gospel,' and then contrast that to what the New Testament says. Look at the approximately 100 places in the NT where the word "gospel" is found; read the context. Please read Acts 17:3; I Cor. 1:23; 2:~2; II Cor. 4:5; Gal. 1:16 -- you will see Paul emphasized Christ, and didn't merely allude to Him in a way which would prevent embarrassment. When Paul preached Christ, the listeners knew Christ had been preached to them, whereas Mr. Armstrong prides himself in being able to preach the "gospel" in a way that no one realizes it has been preached."

"Although God has personally given Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong no commission, he nevertheless feels that virtually every commission God has ever given is his. Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong either thinks he is, or is to do the job given to: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the 'watchman,' the 'inkhorn,' the one who 'cries aloud and spares not,' Elijah to come, a type of John the Baptist, either Joshua or Zerubbabel, one of the two witnesses, an apostle, a 'messenger' one who 'prepares the way,' Hosea, Malachi, Moses (anyone who disdains Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong’s authority or position is immediately compared to Korah), Daniel, Joel, Amos, etc., etc., etc. And, of course, he primarily feels he is to fulfill Matt. 24:14 -- see Rev. 14:6 for the most likely individual to take care of that job."

"When I examined Mr. Armstrong’s 'United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy' belief and found it to be not only scripturally and historically unprovable, but untrue, I realized that virtually my entire concept of Bible prophecy was built on sand; not necessarily the what, but certainly the where, when, and to whom."

"Not only has the Worldwide Church of God set specific dates and placed clear time limits on its prophecies, but time and again it has been in error -- prognosticating that a certain thing will not occur and it does, or that something else will occur which doesn't. Certainly a few of the forecasts have been correct, but when so many are made a few are bound to come to pass."

"When I graduated from Ambassador College, I had no real understanding of the old covenant, and why we kept and followed certain things, and ignored others. Much of the Bible became crystal clear when we realized and accepted that the covenant was made with Ancient Israel, and no one else. Also, we saw that God plainly states that the covenant was to be kept in its entirety, completely, and no place in either the New or Old Testaments are Christians told to keep whatever they feel like keeping. Yet, Mr. Hunting, this is what the Worldwide Church of God does!"

"Please read the covenant to which Israel agreed in Exodus 20-23. How much of that does the Worldwide Church of God obey? I don't mean partially, but exactly as God stated it. The Worldwide Church of God would say that certain portions of the covenant aren't applicable today, or can't be followed because of changed circumstances. However, there is no biblical authority for obeying only part of that covenant. Take Lev. 23 -- where in the NT does it say the Holy Days can be kept apart from the sacrifices which were an integral, if not focal, part of each holy day observance? Why does the Worldwide Church of God, completely arbitrarily, not enforce the blowing of trumpets portion of the Feast of Trumpets (Lev. 23:24), but does enforce the removal of leavening and eating of unleavened bread (Lev. 23:6) during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, but does not enforce God's command to build of branches booths which are to be lived in (Lev. 23:40-42) during the Feast of Tabernacles, does enforce fasting (Lev 23:27, 29, 32) on the Day of Atonement, does not enforce the waving of a sheaf of first fruits during the Days of Unleavened Bread (Lev. 23:10-11), etc., etc.?

There is no biblical authority for such haphazard, fragmented, and selective obedience to God. The entire Day of Atonement observance (as commanded by God in the OT and modified nowhere in the NT) revolved around the goat ceremony, and the Worldwide Church of God is kidding (pardon the pun) itself if it thinks it can observe the Day of Atonement, almost totally disregarding God's instructions for said observance, and then claim to be uncompromising in its obedience to God.

But the problems mentioned above are unavoidable when Christians today try to put themselves in a system God never intended for them. If we offend God's laws regarding the Sabbath, Holy Days, tithing, etc., "in one point," we are "guilty of all," and that is exactly what the Worldwide Church of God is doing as long as it professes to obey portions of God’s Word which were never intended to be followed today."

"Anyway, we have come to research many of the Worldwide Church of God's doctrines, and a close examination shows most of them to be in part, if not completely incorrect."

"Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong always claimed that he 'let the Bible interpret itself.' However, the truth of the matter is that his beliefs and teachings embody a plethora of 'private interpretation.'"

"Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong has frequently quoted Gal. 1:6-9, wherein Paul warns against those who 'pervert the gospel OF CHRIST' and preach 'another gospel.' Well, Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong is a victim of his own quotation -- he indeed perverts the gospel of Christ and preaches another gospel -- the gospel of Herbert Armstrong."

Great Falling Away?

Few "proofs" of Herbert W. Armstrong's claims to greatness are promoted quite like the doctrinal changes implemented by Joseph W. Tkach Sr. But I ask the question, is the breakup of the Worldwide Church of God the "Great Falling Away"?

(2 THS 2: 1-12) 1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Paul is referring to questions about the coming of Jesus and the gathering of His own to Him - ie. the second coming. Keep this firmly in your mind while you read! Though the prophecy of the Antichrist progresses over the millennia, this section is not speaking of anything other than the return of Christ. Not some wispy time previous, not another in a long line of inter-organizational disputes, not some minor blip in the overall workings of mankind, but the single greatest occurrence of the common era. Note that we have not experienced any second coming to date. Ergo, this selection in no way refers to either our current time or more importantly our past. 

Paul is calming the worries of the readers who have been troubled by deceptive reports, from false prophets. People were saying "it has passed", but Paul said "no, it hasn't", and he gives specific details of the very end. 

Notice how he says "as if from us". Someone claiming authority, special understanding, or some secret revelation, was troubling them. If I have demonstrated anything about Herbert Armstrong, it is that he claimed all three of these things, yet he was a false prophet. (See my posts on "False Prophecy" for more details. My blog is the least of sources on this topic! Try this article on for size.) Paul begs us "Let no one deceive you by any means". It's not some simple thing that we can just assign any interpretation we want to this. It is not a ball that we should just casually toss it about. I've read the writings of many COG splinters and they nearly unanimously say "we know the falling away has passed", one even claimed they could prove it! Honestly and plainly, think about it, if this day were past, Christ would be here. I asked you to keep in mind at the beginning that this section is about the return of Jesus Christ. Where is He? If He hasn't returned, then there is no great falling away.

It is currently 2009. The 'great falling away' is claimed to be 14 years ago. Where is Christ? Then that was NOT the great falling away!

Even the very so-called "ministers" who promote this silliness will say there is nothing unusual about the splits in Worldwide.

"Apparently, five of the seven eras were led into oblivion and disaster!"

Gerald Flurri, "Malachi's Message", in section "A Call To Remembrance"

What Gerald Flurry doesn't tell you is that he has no understanding of the history he claims. Most of the men Herman Hoeh claimed were ancestral leaders of the Church of God were actually Catholic reformers. Others were Baptists. Read my post "50 Truths - Part 1" for more info on that.

There are several things listed in the above verses by Paul, not just one. The COGs have been told the falling away has already come, as if it stands alone. It does not. Read it again. There is a falling away, a man of sin revealed, false miracles and wonders, the return of Christ, and finally removal of that man. He is alive when Christ returns. Anyone who says this particular falling away has passed is grossly misinformed. I remind you again that Paul said, "Let no one deceive you by any means." All the claims and all the boastful talk in the world cannot undo the plain words of this epistle. They are nothing but hot air.

I ask, how can a church who boasts that it proves what it believes from the Bible be so very far from the simple words therein?? No one can say "I have proved" that the falling away happened 15 years ago. It cannot be done! Where is the "man of sin"? Joseph W. Tkach Sr.? He's been gone since September 23, 1995! Read the words again "whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming." Where is the Lord? Has He returned? No. Have any saints been gathered to meet Him in the air? No. Did He destroy Joseph Tkack at His coming? No. Joe Tkach Sr. died of complications related to cancer. Was Mr. Tkach accompanied by "all power, signs, and lying wonders"? No. Not a single thing fits. Not one. Yet to bolster their own positions and use prophecy as a tool for control, most COG ministers teach the falling away has passed. This, dear readers, is the very deception Paul warned against!

I will say a third time "Let no one deceive you by any means." Have you allowed these false prophets to deceive you?

O, how very many times I have read damning accusations against the people who remained with the WCG - that they were sent great delusion so they would believe a lie since they do not love the truth. Who is it that believes an untruth? Anyone who accepts Joe Tkach was the "man of sin" and that the falling away has passed are the ones who accept a clear lie. Who, then, is deceived? And this after we were sternly warned by Paul not to be!

These things precede the return of Christ. If there is any explanation for a deceiver that precedes Christ's return, it is here:

(REV. 19: 20) Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.

What do we see here? 

Joseph W. Tkach: Deception? Check. (But no more than is common to all mankind.) Wonders? No. Powered by Satan? Highly unlikely. Destroyed at Christ's return? No. This does not meet the requirements.

False Prophet of Revelation: Deception? Check. Wonders? Check. Powered by Satan? Check. Destroyed at Christ's return? Check. This one meets all requirements. 

Are you willing to say Joseph W. Tkach Sr. is the False Prophet of Revelation? Hardly! Then it is high time we relegate all this slander about Mr. Tkach where it belongs, in the trash!! It is ungodly to misapply these things to someone, especially in such a malicious and deceitful fashion. The truth is in the Bible; the lie is in the slander of the ministry who love to perpetuate a blatant lie. This is not righteousness, but unrighteousness!

"...that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

What personally bothers me the most about all of this is how "the great falling away" is held up as the greatest "proof" of Herbert Armstrong's apostleship; I hear few things more often. But it clearly is no proof at all! These shameless self-promoting ministers twist the gospel for their own gain. Beloved by God, open your eyes and see the truth staring you in the face! For example, read the following:

"Several different churches have been formed by former Worldwide Church of God ministers. All of these churches—including the wcg—are Laodicean, except one. So says your Bible! Only one church has God’s lamp."

Gerald Flurri, "Malachi's Message", in section "A Call To Remembrance"

What is that? Slander. Pure and unadulterated, ungodly, self-promoting deception! Of the same sort which Paul warns us about in 2 Thessalonians. Though I am using him as the example here, Gerald Flurry is not by any means the only one caught up in this type of thing. Almost to the last one, most of Armstrong's ministers are engaged in it.

And it's competition as well. These ones say "God is unity in love", but they display in every way competition in bitterness. 

And for a group who claims their unique relationship with God is based on keeping His commandments, this grossly violates the 6th (EXO. 20: 13; MATT. 5: 21-26) and the 9th (EXO. 20: 16) Commandments. Paul tells us in Romans 13: 9-10, that love is the fulfillment of the law. Yet I see no love here. Christ says in Matthew 22: 39 that the second most important instruction God ever gave us it to love your neighbor as yourself. Are we to assume this is how the ministry would like to be treated? In Matthew 5: 43-47, Jesus takes it even farther and says to love your enemy. Yet I see no love whatsoever in such deceitfulness and opportunistic misapplication of prophecy. On one hand, they call each other "brother", but in the other hand is a knife.

(PRO. 21: 28) A false witness shall perish, but the man who hears him will speak endlessly.

Boy, howdy! Do they speak endlessly! Bearing their tale again and again against the ones they call "God's church" (the Laodiceans are still Christ's).

(PRO. 19: 9) A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who speaks lies shall perish.

This type will tell you there has been the final and great "falling away from the truth", but over and again I have shown in this blog that the truth was not with them to begin with. Certainly not with men such as these! How do you fall away from the truth when there was precious little truth to start with? On the other hand, falling away from a lie is a good thing!

(REV. 2: 2) "and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars"

I'll let Mr. Flurry have the final word on this one:

"If the Ephesus Church members, in a right attitude, tried those who said they were apostles, shouldn’t you?"

Gerald Flurri, "Malachi's Message", in section "A Call To Remembrance"

Quotations from the Hypocrypha

Most of you have probably never heard of Ron Weinland's former publication "News Watch". He started to put these out years ago when he was still in the UCG. I had totally forgotten about them. Mike from Don't Drink the Flavor Aid helped me stumble across these again.

Here are a few selections to show the difference between Ron Weinland of 1999, and Ron Weinland of 2009. The differences are so striking to me, that I have dubbed his collective publications, "The Hypocripha". I had originally put these up as comments on my last post, but I thought they would be easier for everyone to access if they were here.

The larger point I'm hammering away at is that this is exactly the same thing that Herbert Armstrong did. If RW is such and such a person, then so is HWA, because they are both the same! Yet so many people see RW for what he is, and still give HWA a pass. This astounds me. It's a complete double standard. They still say (and this is a recent quote I received from a minister), "if any man today was found to be guilty of what David did that they would be rejected as a servant of God as well." Incredible! The lengths to which people will go to reason around what they don't want to accept. If that's how this minister honestly feels, then he should completely accept RW as a servant of God. That's not gonna happen.

Shall we begin?

[God's government] is not about rank or position, but a matter of serving and giving. That is spiritual!"

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", July 1998

"The ministry has fallen back into the old, comfortable administrative style learned in WCG. Such administration is rarely one of shepherding, but of control, manipulation, politics and lethargy, all of which has been hard on God's people. ... The blindness within the ministry is so great that many elders will not have the remotest idea what I am talking about. But there are humble, faithful brethren who do know and see clearly what is being said."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", July 1998

Hypocrisy upon hypocrisy!

Those 'humble, faithful brethren' are here, reading this, and seeing through RW like so much glass.

RW quotes Eze. 13: 8-10 and then says,

"These words should be intently sobering when one considers how we in the ministry can go about building a structure after the image we once knew [meaning the WCG] and do so to the neglect of so many of God's people who have been scattered or lost. And when flaws in the structure are pointed out, every effort is made to secretly cover those flaws as hurriedly as possible, making declarations about false accusers or attacks from Satan. The flaws and weaknesses are denied by declaring stability, growth and the need to go forward doing God's work."

"Sometimes it is hard for God's people--especially within the ministry--to see themselves realistically. We seem to believe we cannot be in error if we are His people, especially if we are His ministers. But God gives warnings to His people and to His ministers."

"We need to be jolted by the reality that we will reap what we sow, not deceiving ourselves that we are somehow exempt from judgment simply because we bear God's name. We must not deceive ourselves by thinking we are special as His ministers and somehow bear no accountability."

"Continuing with "business as usual" or total denial of our problems will only bring swift punishment."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", July 1998

"We have not done well in this regard, often failing to love others ... as we should. This simply reflects the state of dysfunction in many spiritual lives, which means we really are not as spiritual as we think we are. A major part of the problem is that we do not tend to see ourselves realistically. Therein comes the"denial."

The ability to see oneself realistically --as God sees us-- is a matter of the spirit, His spirit. It is only natural or carnal for us to deny our true spiritual state. It is a normal consequence of man's selfish nature to "pass the buck" concerning personal responsibility and to also deny ones own culpability."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", August 1998

Wait a minute here... are we to believe that hearing voices and declaring ones self the One Witnesses is being realistic?

"[Some ministers] are trying to strengthen their hold on the congregations they are supposed to be "serving and leading," instead of "ruling and controlling!"

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", August 1998

"Brethren are becoming easy prey to charlatans, false ministers, and crackpots who are only making merchandise of them. One of the primary purposes of News Watch is to warn brethren and expose these kinds of dangers to God's scattered flock."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", August 1998

HA!! Is this a joke??

"[Ministers] often fail to grasp that their own practices have spawned a great deal of the adverse reaction and heightened sensitivities"

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", Oct/Nov 1998

"ministers focus on themselves and all the work they are doing to build up themselves and the organization they serve. They make great plans for the future and try to get others to focus on those dreams."

"Yes, the ministry has been turning inward. Many are concerned about job security and retirement. As a result, compromise subtly encroaches on sound standards of shepherding, integrity, moral leadership, faithful administration, and sound-mindedness. Self-preservation, control, compromise, and other sins become the norm and cannot be recognized nor admitted because sin leaves one groping in the dark. Ministers get caught up in petty jealousies, worrying about brethren listening to other ministers (even within their own organizations). They become territory conscious and numbers conscious, all out of selfish gain."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", Oct/Nov 1998

I feel this completely applies to RW's current self.

"The environment in some church corporations makes [looking to God first and foremost] almost impossible to achieve because their structures require a kind of allegiance that is actually spiritual idolatry."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", Oct/Nov 1998

Look to "2008 God's Final Witness", (or "Mystery of the Ages"), not the Bible! (He says sarcastically.)

"But the sad reality is that too many ministers abuse their power, control and manipulate brethren..."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", Oct/Nov 1998

Right! And RW's one of 'em.

"Sad to say, we find many within the scattered organizations who are coming to the defense of 'the church of their choice,' justifying and excusing the errors, false teachings, unrighteous behavior, and corruption of some of their leaders. Our condition has deteriorated to the point that many brethren not only justify, but also lend strong support that enables such leaders to strengthen their hold and become more deeply entrenched in their wrong practices. This is not a small thing before God, and He holds both the supported and supporter responsible."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", Dec 1998

"For some, lying is apparently justifiable if it is deemed to be for the greater good of an organization, for unity, or for the sake of 'the Work.' Some abdicate all responsibility saying it is not our place to judge our leaders, regardless of their actions. Of course, complacency is so prevalent that many are unconcerned about lies and either are unable to see them or choose not to see them. Some simply give blind support."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", Dec 1998

"Please don't misunderstand, I do not consider myself above them, nor am I speaking out of resentment. I am speaking out of my own shame and heartache for what I have done in my weaknesses as well."

Ron Weinland, "News Watch", Jan 1999

Where the heck is more of this? Where did this Ron Weinland go?

I don't terribly much enjoy posting this stuff. I prefer a more civilized approach to blogging. There's something uncomfortably negative about this. Even so, I feel it has to be done. People need access to this information. I have probably one more post that I want to do in this vein. I just came across an old sermon that RW gave years ago, right before he kicked out half the Toledo congregation. I found it interesting. Then, I seriously hope to return to a more 'comfortable' format.

Ron Weinland on Government

These words were from a man few would recognize. It goes pretty well in line with my previous article where Herbert Armstrong declared the very governmental structure of the Worldwide Church of God to be none other than the Image of the Beast of Revelation.

This post is going to be a tad more negative than what you're used to here, but I feel in the mood to hold a person to his own standards.

I would submit for your inspection evidence that in all ways Ronald Weinland is like his mentor, and if anyone will call Ron Weinland a false prophet, false apostle, Christ monger, hypocrite, flip-flopper, or any other such thing, then they must in kind use the exact same measure on the other.

"Brethren can become quite confused when they begin listening to all the different ideas about government put forth by competing organizations. Who is right? Where is God? Is God as divided as it would appear when listening to so many conflicting views on the subject? And after all, doesn't each organization believe it has the best structure, or even the only correct structure?

"Some believe organization or government is all about the proper structure. The pendulum swings far and wide on this subject. On one end we are told that only one man can be at the top in a kind of hierarchy, while at the other end it is claimed that such structure is of Satan, of the gentiles, or the way of the Nicolaitans. And between these two is another great smorgasbord. Where is God in all this?

"Is God's government established upon rank, administrative structure or control? Some seem to think so. Do such things produce the fruits of unity and closeness God desires in His family? Obviously not!

"Any government or organization (corporation) is only as good as the integrity and morality of those who administer it and submit to it. 

"As a case in point, it might be good to comment on the obsession with the name Philadelphia. Many want to see themselves as Philadelphian, because they believe it sounds so good. ... Bearing the name of a Philadelphian is not nearly as high a commendation as what God said to some in Thyatira: "I know your works, love [agape], service, faith, and your patience; and as for your works, the last are more than the first" (Revelation 2:19, NKJ).

"If ministers and brethren use biblical terminology to jockey for position, despising those whom they see as inferior, is it any wonder people have strayed so far from understanding what the gospel message is all about? 

"Those are powerful words! Do you understand the depth and beauty of what they say? Can you discern such love? To do so demands a close relationship with God, being truly yielded to Him in genuine humility--by God living in us. Too many people in God's Church have allowed His love to wax cold in their lives. The result is the growing confusion over organization and government that we see today."

Ronald Weinland, "News Watch", Oct-Nov, 1998

I should remind everyone that this was published less than one year before the time when RW started prepping his Toledo, Ohio congregation to accept him as sole possessor of authority and master of top-down government. He took over the church board, disfellowshipping them, and expelled many of the congregation in February 2000. (Check out the fabulous and improved timeline over at Don't Drink the Flavor Aid for more details.) 

I conclude, therefore, that he knew he was being deceptive when he penned it, and did so merely to throw off suspicions.

Oh how the mighty have fallen...

Sick, sick, sick.

**See my next post on Quotations from the Hypocrypha for more of this sort of thing.

MORE COG Theological Ancestry

Back in September 2008 I posted about the COG Theological Ancestry.  I still believe that HWA gained much of what he believed from A. N. Dugger, but I wonder how much he got from G. G. Rupert. Rupert is undeniably a large source of inspiration for HWA. But was he as important as I had previously assumed? It may seem I overestimated Rupert - in at least one area.

I happened across an article on, of all places, the Worldwide Church of God website. I may not be willling to send my tithes in to Joe Jr., but I like his new direction. The WCG has access to material I could only dream of. I would love to spend a month in their archives! And they aren't afraid to apologize for their past. 

One manifestation of their guilt is a well written three-part document entitled "Herbert Armstrong and Anglo-Israelism" By Ralph Orr, from 1996. Here is a quote to whet the appetite:

"How did Mr. Armstrong come to believe in Anglo-Israelism? One possible source is G.G. Rupert, a Sabbath-keeper in Oklahoma. In 1915 Rupert convinced A.N. Dugger to allow him to advertise his book The Yellow Peril in The Bible Advocate. Thus it is possible that Herbert Armstrong could have come across Rupert's book in back issues of the Advocate. However, no evidence exists that proves Rupert to be the source for Mr. Armstrong's Anglo-Israelism. Rupert's Anglo-Israelism was not his Anglo-Israelism.

"However, Herbert Armstrong did (perhaps later) become familiar with Rupert's work. Copies of Rupert publications were among Mr. Armstrong's possessions. Rupert's observance of the biblical festivals might have increased his attractiveness to Herbert Armstrong. Still, an examination of Mr. Armstrong's correspondence for the late 1920s proves that his Anglo-Israelite beliefs came from another direction, which we will now discuss."

This study touches on some great topics, such as how HWA came to believe he had a special calling from God. Wouldja believe, it was because some strange woman arrived at his door and asked him to unload some wood? Sounds like a Monty Python skit to me. Strange women, walking around in towns, distributing wood, is no basis for a church government.

"There was no vision. There was no dream. There was no voice. There was only the woman at the door with an offer for him to stack wood, which he concluded was an answer to prayer. That offer to stack wood kept the Armstrongs from starving and enabled him to continue to write. This was all it took to convince him that he had a unique calling — a God-ordained commission to shout the Third Angel's Message to the world."

This is it, ladies and gentlemen. This is what Armstrongism is based on - wood stacking.

Whenever the topic of HWA's flaws is brought up among his followers, inevitably there is this response: "If King David were alive today, would you reject him for his flaws too?" Answer: if King David were alive today he would be speaking with God via legitimate prophets, with signs and other wonders, and not relying on a hunch and an old woman with wood. If only it were true that he spent hours studying the Bible and praying on his knees and God revealed the truth to him. Yet that isn't so. I can demonstrate quite easily how his theologies grew and changed over the years (remember church government, Pentecost, D&R, etc?). There was no great revelation. It really, truly, incredibly boils down to a woman and a pile of wood. Hundreds of thousands of people call him an apostle because of this.

The most important thing to understanding Armstrongism is British-Isralism. That was what HWA was on about in those formative years. The false doctrine of British-Israelism is key to understanding Herbert Armstrong. It is the main reason the WCG split from the COG7. This study is incredibly informative on many fronts, but especially on how HWA came to accept British-Israelism. I highly recommend it!

One bad thing is that navigating the website is clunky. The WCG needs to revise the site. I think the study used to be in 5 parts, because the links are numbered incorrectly. On the bottom of the second page, after the list of references, is a link to the next section. It says it takes you to part 5. Ignore the incorrect numbering and just click the link. Even the naming of the html pages is totally incorrect.

If it makes things easier, I will link to the three parts here for you.

PART 1 

PART 2 

PART 3 

The 1979 Receivership and the Big 3

I was reading through some of the old Pastor's Reports (later, Pastor General's Reports), I had a hunch that it would be interesting, and I wanted to review what I saw there with you.

Reading those reports reminded me of something. Recently, I saw the CEO's of GM, Ford, and Chrysler appear before Congress, begging for Congress to forcefully extract money from the taxpayers and transfer it to them in return for nothing. Generally, this is called "theft". They can't sell us their cars, so they figure rather than build a car that we will buy, they will simply confiscate our money. I very much enjoyed listening to the Senators rip them up one side and down the other for show. Oh, they'll get the money. But the rub is that those three men flew to D.C. on private jets. This is something HWA often did. Cry and cry about cash shortages, but live like a god on earth. And so he was, in his own mind. That's where I'd like to start.

HWA was the 'god on earth' of the Worldwide Church of God.

Mr. Armstrong has been the spiritual and temporal leader of the Church since its inception

-Mike Blackwell, Pastor's Report, p. 3, Jan. 30, 1979

Not just temporal, but spiritual and temporal!

I am the founder, Pastor General , and spiritual and temporal leader of defendant Worldwide Church of God, Inc. (" Worldwide") . In addition, I am chief executive officer, chairman of the board of directors and chairman of the board of trustees of Worldwide and its two related entities, defendants Ambassador College, Inc. ("Ambassador"), and Ambassador International Cultural Foundation, Inc. ("AICF"); together with Worldwide, Ambassador and ASCF will collectively be referred to herein as "the Church".

The Church, which was originally known as the Radio Church of God, was founded by me in the mid-1930's for the purpose of proclaiming "the Gospel throughout the world as a witness of the coming of the Kingdom of God." Matthew 24:14. I am the appointed Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and, as such, have been both the spiritual and temporal leader of the Church from its inception.

-Herbert Armstrong, Pastor's Report, pp. 28-29, Jan. 8, 1979

JESUS CHRIST chose and appointed me

-Herbert Armstrong, Pastor General's Report, p. 3, Jan. 31, 1980

Of 5 general categories of letters received by Worldwide's Mail Processing Center, number 5 was:

"The writers know that Mr. Armstrong is God's Apostle."

-Richard Rice (Mail Processing Center), p. 4, Feb. 5, 1979

The April 23rd, 1979 Pastor's Report includes some of the most unsettling diatribes on HWA's personal power and authority that I have ever read, and he authored the material himself. He made it perfectly clear, he is the sole head of the church on earth, all plans are planned by him, all decisions are made by him, and there is no number 2.

He was so confident in his authority, he felt he did not have to submit to the authority of the state government.

I will not submit to government's administering the Government of God's Church and Work. 

Herbert Armstrong, Pastor's Report, p. 31, Jan. 8, 1979

When they wanted something (usually money) they could be very liberal in Biblical interpretation, for example changing Deuteronomy 16 from speaking of 3 holy days into speaking of 7 holy days, or for another example changing burnt offerings into money offerings. As such, when they wanted to get away with something, they were equally as fast and loose.

Romans 13: 1 says " Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers." But notice carefully that it doesn't say "obey" every detail of what the higher powers may tell you to do. Be subject to those higher powers, nevertheless. During Nazi Germany there were laws and programs of the state that you as a Christian would have had to refuse to do. Perhaps you in many cases would have quietly, non-violently disobeyed by omission, being subject to the powers that be and any penalties they might impose.

-Rod Merideth, Pasor's Report, p. 8, March 13, 1979

God help you if you so much as question church policy, but rebellion against the state is no big deal. After all, when the state wants HWA's ill-gotten gains, it's tantamount to Hitler's Nazi Germany! And why not? When HWA wanted your hard-earned gains, it was tantamount to the end of God's work on earth!

Therefore, as the appointed Apostle of Jesus Christ, I commanded Messrs. Raymond McNair, Roderick Meredith, Ellis LaRavia, Ralph Helge, and Stanley R. Rader, in Christ 's name, to do everything possible to protect the Church's operations under me

Herbert Armstrong, Pastor's Report, p. 31, Jan. 8, 1979

He appointed those men to protect his physical organization, all the while telling the lay members that the physical organization was not important. "The church is spiritual!" he said. This is double-speak, of course. Often one thing was said in one place, and another thing in another place. It depended on what outcome was desired. Take this next statement for example:

Although Armstrong did not advise followers to break the law, he stressed that loyal members of the Worldwide Church would “obey God . . . and fight to protect and honor the very building of God.”

-Russell Chandler, L.A. Times, Jan. 23, 1979

The "very building of God" was Worldwide. HWA fled out of state, to Tucson, Arizona. He left his generals in charge in Pasadena. And when it became convenient, HWA planned to abandon the WCG (the "very building of God") and begin a new organization under the name "Philadelphia Church of God". Not so important after all, I guess. But why abandon it?

When the temporary Receiver (now dismissed) fired me, I was not in California . I continued to RUN THE WORK from Tucson. The Receiver tried for a short time to run the Work, but he was UNABLE! Immediately I had money sent in MY care which was deposited in a corporate account here in Tucson [corporate perhaps, but NOT a WCG account; they were separate. See Pastor's Report, p. 4, April 17, 1979]. He had no control over GOD'S tithes. We funneled funds into Pasadena just in time t o pay God's Church bills and the Receiver was unable to lay his hands on the money--which was his goal.

-Herbert Armstrong, Pastor General's Report, p. 3, Jan. 31, 1980

It is always about the money!! The state of California was interested in taking control of the money. If there's one thing governments love it's money. However, the stated purpose of the receivership was to stop HWA and Stan Rader from stealing it for themselves. It was just as much about the money with HWA as with the state of California. Now HWA put into practice his rebellion against the state; he had his precious tithes diverted to Tucson, and safely out of the hands of the government.

let the brethren know emphatically that Mr. Armstrong has directed (and, for the record, I and all on our P.A.D. team emphatically agree!) that ALL U.S. tithes and offerings be sent to "Herbert W. Armstrong" P. O. Box 431 Tucson, Arizona, 85702"

-Rod Merideth, Pastor General's Report, p. 3, March 5, 1979

As you know, Mr. Armstrong has asked that all donations to the Work be made payable to "Herbert W. Armstrong" and sent to Tucson for processing. However, some are still making their checks out to "Worldwide Church of God" and sending them to Tucson. These "WCG" checks cannot be deposited in Tucson and are forwarded to Pasadena for processing. Any checks of this type will be acknowledged on "Worldwide Church of God" receipts.

All checks should be made payable to "Herbert W. Armstrong" and mailed to Tucson.

-Rod Merideth, Pastor General's Report, p. 4, April 17, 1979

"Headquarters today is in my very small office in Tucson, Arizona.

"Some get the idea that Headquarters is in Pasadena"

-Herbert Armstrong, Pastor's Report, p. 6, April 23, 1979

On Jan. 27, 1979, previous to these announcements, the ministers were forbidden by the state of California to contribute to Herbert Armstrong's new ministry or to allow the diversion of church money to him. Now we see why the loophole to disobey the state had to be created - MONEY!

From the comfort of Tucson, Arizona, outside of California's jurisdiction and in complete safety, HWA said:

‘‘I wonder If people aren’t going to have to go to jail,” he continued, adding: “If we have to suffer the persecution of being thrown in jail, then I’m ready to go. . . if they want to arrest 86-year-old people”

-Russell Chandler, L.A. Times, Jan. 23, 1979

Of course he's going to say that. He was completely safe. He was in utterly no danger of jail. It's easy to talk smack when you know you can't be called out. I could say that I will go to Mars right now and without any helmet, because I'm not afraid! But that's because I know there's absolutely no chance of me being put in that position.

And the beat went on.

I want to ask every one of you to give a sermon within the next couple of weeks encouraging the brethren to do their part in God's Work and to enthusiastically build their zeal toward paying God's tithes to his Work and toward generously and even sacrificially giving the generous offerings that are so needed at this time in the very Work of the Living Christ!

-Rod Merideth, Pastor General's Report, p. 2, March 5, 1979

It wasn't good enough to ask for tithes. A tithe is only 10%. No, HWA needed 3 tithes, a 'tithe of a tithe', 7 holy day offerings, freewill offerings whenever it could be afforded, and still that wasn't enough!

Because of the very tight financial situation we will be in for the next few months, we want to start immediately to implement a fine idea Mr. Richard Rice has submitted. It involves church fund raising projects. We will send you a complete packet on this within a few days, but I would like to ask all of you personally to start NOW to begin planning and perhaps even preliminary organization of fund raising projects in your area as a special emergency crusade to raise monies to be sent to Tucson at the earliest possible date. Get your leading members together, and begin to organize different groups to engage in painting houses, cleaning houses, ironing, mending, etc., washing cars, selling farm produce, artwork, baby sitting, conducting paper drives, yard and garage sales, bake sales, quilting bees, collecting scrap iron, delivering sales papers or advertisements for local firms, etc.

This is one way the members can directly have "a piece of the action" in SERVING God's Work at this time, and yet it will involve very little of their own personal money -- merely time, effort and elbow grease. So please try to catch the vision, fellows, and get your churches enthusiastically involved in these projects as soon as possible.

-Rod Merideth, Pastor's Report, p.1, March 27, 1979

Never mind how having "a piece of the action" in serving God involves living a Godly life, loving one another, and confessing that Jesus is Lord. Never mind that. They didn't understand it. These men were so confused that they thought raising money of all things is the responsibility of every Christian.

At the very same time they were asking ministers and local churches to go without pay (see Pastor's Report, p. 10., March 13, 1979). Yet, exactly like the now infamous CEO's of the "Big Three", they didn't bother to stop their own wastefulness:

God willing, a number of us will be flying out from headquarters to visit many of your areas during the Passover season!

I will be going to Cincinnati for the Passover and then to New York for the last part of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Denny Luker will be going to Seattle-Tacoma for the Passover and then to Portland for the last half. Burk McNair will be going to Washington, D.C. for the Passover and then to Charlotte and later Richmond for the last part of the Feast. Gerald Waterhouse will be going to St. Louis for the Passover and then to Nashville for the last half. And Sherwin McMichael will be going to Minneapolis for Passover and then to Kansas City for the last half of the Feast.

-Rod Merideth, Pastor's Report, pp. 2-3, March 27, 1979

Yes. While the church sacrifices and the ministers go without pay, the elite are jet-setting. And if you didn't like all this, should you somehow cut through the layers of secrecy and find out about what was really going on, you would be under strict command to shut up and do as you are told or be disfellowshipped and "marked".

So you listen carefully , and all of you, as you know, are forbidden to associate with, and to eat with, or fellowship with, and if you're really loyal, you're not going out and commiserate with people and say: "Oh well, let's all be the underdog and yak it up and try to judge God's apostle."

-Rod Merideth, Pastor's Report, p. 10, Jan. 8, 1979

This from the same man who wiggled his way out of responsibility to obey the state of California. I say, the same logic applies here.

I will continue to climb into the way-back machine and read these Pastor's Reports. I don't know why. I must be a masochist or something. Maybe I think it's relevant for today since these same games go on as they always had.

Anyway, the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. come to mind, "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, [I am] free at last!" ...and I would like those people who are still trapped in Armstrongism to be free with me.

The Babylon Connection

I have finished reading “The Babylon Connection” by Ralph Woodrow, and I wish to share my thoughts on it with you, if you will bear with me.

“The Babylon Connection” is 9 chapters, 119 pages, of very easy to read information countering Alexander Hislop and his book “The Two Babylons”. This is no deep scholarly work given to verbosity and headiness. Even though there was an under-tone of sarcasm, I still found the information to be more than valuable.

If you are unfamiliar with Alexander Hislop’s book (and I don’t know how you could possibly not be familiar with it) I will sum it up for you: the Catholic Church is the biblical entity called ‘Babylon the Great’,the Pope is the Antichrist, Protestants are harlots, and all of the traditions of the churches come from ancient Babylon. In fact, the subtitle of Hislop’s book is “The Papal worship proved to be the worship of Nimrod and his wife.”
And this is a pillar in the theology of Herbert Armstrong, right next to British-Israelism.

Woodrow was once a firm believer in Hislop and probably his greatest proponent. He had written a book based on Hislop’s, entitled “Babylonian Mystery Religion”. After being challenged by one Mr. Scott Klemm, Woodrow began to research and understand the flawed nature of how Hislop came to his conclusions. Woodrow wrote “The Babylon Connection” in response to what he had learned. He points out the many flaws, contradictions, errors, and even lies which Hislop left strewn about in his book. Woodrow’s point in writing the book was not to prove or disprove the claim that the Catholic Church had absorbed many pagan practices. His point was that Hislop’s research was so entirely farcical that it could in no way be trusted. I think Woodrow was quite convincing towards this goal.

What it comes down to is that Hislop took ancient myths from around the world, or even artistic renderings of mythical figures, distorted the information to his liking, and then attributed it to Nimrod… oh, and Semiramis… and Cain, Noah, Adam, Satan, and a host of other people. For example, on pages 7 through 9, Woodrow lists FIFTY NINE separate mythological, Biblical, and historical figures that Hislop claims are other names for Nimrod. If taking three pages to list the various identities of Nimrod isn’t fantastical enough for you, Hislop simultaneously attributes those very same identities to other people.

One example is in that Hislop in various pages of his book referred to Semiramis as being Nimrod’s wife, and again his daughter, and again his mother, and again that Nimrod had two mothers, and again nine mothers. And this is history? Woodrow counters with evidence that Semiramis and Nimrod did not even live in the same century together!

Another example would be this quote from page 21 of Woodrow’s book:

“Hislop says Nimrod was the ‘Father of the gods’; Cush, Nimrod’s father, was the ‘Father of the gods’; Kronos was the ‘Father of the gods’ – all of these statements being found on page 32 [of The Two Babylons]! On page 277 he says Pluto, the god of Hell, was the ‘Father of the gods’. On page 164 he says Seb was the ‘Father of the gods.’ On page 27 he says Vulcan was the ‘Father of the gods.’ On page 299 he says Saturn was the ‘Father of the gods,’ who ‘was in one aspect just our first parent Adam!’ Does any of this make sense?”

I would have to conclude no!

Let’s see… what else doesn’t make sense? Woodrow shows Hislop to be false when states the Catholic traditions were begun by Nimrod and Semiramis. Remember, Hislop claims almost all Catholic traditions started in ancient Babylon – including Christmas, Easter, steeples, the fish symbol, candles, relics, a round communion wafer (emphasis on the round), halos, confession, a mother and child, a trinity, the bright clothes of the Pope, the dark vestments of the priesthood, and a whole host of other such things. Not only that, but the very rites of Christianity itself Hislop attributes to Nimrod - including anointing with oil, baptism for the remission of sins, a suffering savior, and the cross.

Woodrow quotes an article from ‘The Saturday Review’ printed September 17th, 1859. This article speaks about Hislop’s book. I found it so compelling, I would like to quote it here.

“In the first place, his whole superstructure is raised upon nothing. Our earliest authority for the history of Semiramis wrote about the commencement of the Christian era, and the historian from whom he drew his information lived from fifteen hundred to two thousand years after the date Which Mr. Hislop assigns to the great Assyrian Queen. The most lying legend which the Vatican has ever endorsed stands on better authority than the history which is now the ground of a charge against it.

”Secondly, the whole argument proceeds upon the assumption that all heathenism has a common origin. Accidental resemblances in mythological details are taken as evidence of this, and nothing is allowed for the natural working of the human mind.

“Thirdly, Mr. Hislop’s method of reasoning would make anything of anything. By the aid of obscure passages in third-rate historians [sic], groundless assumptions of identity, and etymological torturing of roots, all that we know, and all that we believe, may be converted…into something totally different.

“Fourthly, Mr. Hislop’s argument proves too much. He finds not only the corruptions of Popery, but the fundamental articles of the Christian Faith, in his hypothetical Babylonian system…

“We take leave of Mr. Hislop and his work with the remark that we never before quite knew the folly of which ignorant or half-learned bigotry is capable.”

Indeed! Couldn’t have said it better myself. Now, if only the COGs would read this!! I lost track of how many times Hislop was quoted in the Living Church of God’s material which they sent me.

Speaking of “etymological torturing”, one thing Herbert Armstrong was well known for is completely bogus word etymology.  Take a word, find something else that sounds similar – no matter where the word is from – and draw a conclusion. Voila! Instant etymology. We are all familiar with how Armstrong tried to link the Pope to the word “Lateinos” and thus the number 666. In the final paragraphs of page 2 from the February 1938 Plain Truth magazine, under the section heading “Was Mussolini Reared By A Witch?”, Herbert Armstrong made the following comment, “His title, ‘Il Duce’, is derived from the Saxon word ‘duce,’ meaning ‘DEMON.’” What garbage! I'm calling this. “Il Duce” actually means “the Commander”, and it is taken from the Latin work “ducem”, from which we get the word Duke. 

Deceptive etymology is an honored tradition of Armstrongism. Herman Hoeh was a master at this kind of twisted nonsense. If anyone could excel Hislop, it would be Hoeh. Also, I once personally heard Steven M. Collins claim the Biblical “Javan” is in fact “Japan”; and he based his claim almost entirely on the sound of the words. Never mind “Japan” and “Japanese” are American words. The Japanese call themselves Nahon-jin, they speak Nahon-go, and they are from the land of Nippon - which sounds nothing like Javan. Biblical Javan is associated with Greece by most Biblical scholars. Woodrow points out how Hislop does this sort of thing time and time again.

To make a long story short, why does it even concern me? Well, because Herbert Armstrong so adamantly fed his church Hislop’s swill. He raised it nearly to par with scripture. Not only that, but many splinter groups (though not all, to their credit) continue the tradition – decades after Hislop was proven to be wholly unreliable. As I mentioned before, I have recently received booklets from COGs that all but base their whole argument on Hislop’s folly. If it were just Hislop, that would be one thing. But his material in the hands of Herbert Armstrong makes this stuff dangerous.

Did I fail to mention it is entirely based upon this abject nonsense that the COGs foment an unbroken history of condemnation against the entirety of mainstream Christianity? True!
Before HWA got sucked into Hislop's lies he used to praise Luther and Calvin as messengers from God.
Now they call the Pope the Antichrist for crying out loud! They claim he is destined to burn in Gehenna. They do everything they can to tie the office to the numbers 666. They claim the Protestant churches are the harlot daughter churches of Babylon the Great Harlot in Rome, and Christ does not listen to their prayers. Rarely if ever do they use the term “Christian” when relating to anyone but themselves, preferring the derogatory term “so-called Christians”.
And why debase several billion people against the clear teachings of the New Testament? Hislop.

I used to believe this stuff. I used to say these terrible things. That is why I feel it necessary to write this. God forgive me. My fellow Christians forgive me. I was deceived!

And kudos to Ralph Woodrow for his book. You can get one for $8 on Amazon.com.

By This All Will Know

As a member of the COGs, I believed that God had revealed certain knowledge to me. This is pretty much the case for all religions. But I felt God had specifically opened my mind to receive certain hidden and encoded knowledge which no man can naturally accept because God is not opening their minds to accept it at this time. It was this knowledge (gnosis) that we believed set us apart. The understanding of this special, secret knowledge is what made us unique and proved God is in us. I felt that I had won the universe's greatest lotto!

An unusual thing occurred to me one day while listening to a message about exactly what it is that God had revealed to the COGs which He had not revealed to anyone else. So many people have been trying to pin it down. It had never occurred to me that rarely would two people agree, nor would those things mentioned be unique to the COGs. So I asked, how on earth could special knowledge set us apart if we didn't even know exactly what that knowledge was? And how on earth could anything be specially revealed and make make us unique if other churches also knew?

In one of my last conversations with my former minister (who I love and respect even now), he mentioned to me that what we were right - meaning other religions had missed the mark. I replied, "That's not proof. EVERYONE thinks they're right. Or else they wouldn't be doing what they do." Can everyone be right? Of course not. Not when so many people believe so many things that are completely at odds. Who is right? I think all Christians would agree God is right. So the question becomes 'what does the God of the Bible have to say about this?' I would like to investigate what the Bible says that sets a person apart and what is real proof of the in-dwelling of the Spirit.

Let's look in to what the situation is. 

Truths had been hidden by God since the fall of Adam that needed to be revealed to mankind (I COR. 2: 7; EPH. 3: 9; COL. 1: 26). Jesus came with the task of doing that (MATT. 13: 10-17) This privilege was given mainly to the 12 Apostles, and they were commanded to go into all the world and spread this message (MARK 16: 15). They did not fail at that. 

God gives us now what He gave them then, and He did not give to either of us what He did not give to the other. The faith was delivered once, and for all time (JUDE 1: 3). All of those who claim God is giving them special knowledge that He did not give to the Apostles are certainly greatly suspect of being false prophets, hungry wolves, roaring lions, and deceivers. God has revealed these same truths continually from the time of the Apostles to those who reciprocate to His calling. If the gates of death will not prevail over His Church, then there was no time when that truth was not being made continually available to men. Specifically it says that those who believe Jesus is coming [continually coming; present tense] in the flesh, are of God (I JOHN 4: 2-3).

No man can find word one in the Bible of a predicted 1,900 year gap in God's work as Herbert Armstrong has claimed in his book 'Mystery of the Ages' (and indeed in many other places). Even so, there is certainly predicted by God to be those who do not receive the message. Take for example the prophecies of deceivers existing at the return of Christ. When Christ returns, He will call the Jews to Himself, so there will yet be Jews. And there is certainly predicted to be a time where there is a famine of the word. When that is, how long, who is involved, and other such questions cannot be answered with confidence because the details are not there. It could already be past for all we know.

I find it an odd thing that the Churches of God claim mankind lost God's truth in a 1,900 year famine and this is the time when God is re-revealing His truth in full again to a select group of mankind before the return of Christ. We know what is believed and taught in the COGs, and we know nothing in 1,900 years exactly matches it, so it is indeed unique (although not nearly as unique as people would like to believe), therefore it is reasoned God must have specially re-revealed it to HWA at this time. It's the only thing that makes sense to a faithful member. The alternative is to see the uniqueness as evidence of error. But if the vast majority of those things were not kept by what the COGs claim are their ancestor churches, then how can those things be that important to salvation?

As far as errors go, they are not unique to any group. No one has the whole truth. Is the whole of what Christ gave not made available to us? Sure it is. However, we are human and have our own weaknesses to deal with. We have pride, prejudice, tradition, laziness, assumptions, conformity, complacency, stubbornness, respect of persons, fear, etc that distracts us from the whole of what Christ gave. Not to mention the revealed secrets were only partially revealed. (I COR. 13: 9-10) "For we know in part and we prophesy in part." It would appear that many groups have varying degrees of the revealed message. Is it then the possession of the 'whole truth' that sets a person apart? How can it be? The whole truth is not given. Nor would I believe a human being can accept the whole truth were it given. OK then, is what sets a person apart the acceptance of the whole of what Christ did reveal? How can it be? Even the COGs commonly say 'no one has the whole truth'. Who among the COGs would be so bold as to say you understand entirely what Christ was given to reveal? *chirping crickets* That settles that.

We've looked in to what it isn't. Any idea on what it is?

**I am going to post a LOT of Bible verses here, so please either follow along with a Bible, or follow along with Bible Gateway. Actually, I highly recommend downloading e-sword, the add-ons are fantastic.

Short answer: sanctification is by the Spirit and belief in the truth (2 THS. 2: 13). Even some in the Churches of God readily admit that "the truth" consists of who Jesus Christ is and what He is doing. So what is this truth?

It is Jesus who saves, and everyone that faithfully believes in the Son and acknowledges their belief to others will be saved (JOHN 6: 47; ROM. 10: 9-13; JOHN 3: 16-17; JOHN 10: 9, ACTS 4: 12; ACTS 16: 31; I THS. 5: 9); such faith comes by exposure to the word of God (ROM. 10: 14-16); it involves knowing He died and has risen (I COR. 15: 1-8); it involves God's grace through Christ (ACTS 15: 11; EPH. 2: 5, 8; TIT. 2: 11; 2 PET. 3: 15); along with that comes baptism (MARK 16: 16). Certainly there is more to being a Christian than this, like holding fast to the end, but we have to stop somewhere.

It IS a calling. 

(JOHN 6: 44-45) "44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me."

It doesn't say "will come to Herbert Armstrong", but to Christ. It doesn't say "will come to the Old Covenant", but to Christ, along with His gospel (ROM. 1: 6; EPH. 1: 13), and the New Covenant (JER. 31: 31; MATT. 26: 28). After hearing the word of truth, and believing in Christ Jesus, then a person is sealed with the Holy Spirit (EPH. 1: 13).

By the very nature of that, it is not in Herbert Armstrong  or any man (I COR. 1: 12; I COR. 3: 4), and not in the Old Covenant law. But the COGs counter "I need the law and holy days to understand what Christ is doing." I partly disagree with that. Take for example the sacrifices and offerings that we know pictured Christ. Do we need to do those things in order to understand them? No. But they indeed hold much value if we do look into them. 

The difference is in keeping the Old Covenant (more importantly, keeping it partially). Many in the COGs read Romans 8: 14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.", but they skip the next verse "For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption". Do those who aspire to keep the Old Covenant understand this? Galatians 4: 21-31 clearly represents those who attempt to keep the Old Covenant laws as being in bondage, and those who attempt to keep the New Covenant as being sons. The COGs believe one of the signs of the Spirit working in a person's life is that they will keep the Old Covenant laws. I could not disagree more! I think one of the main failings of Armstrongism is that it gets tripped up with the Old Covenant.  (GAL 5: 8) "This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you."

The Old Covenant is profitable only to those who keep it in its entirety (GAL. 5: 3; JAS. 2: 10). Keeping the laws of Moses is NOT necessary in order to be saved (ACTS 15: 1-2; 2 TIM. 1: 9; TIT. 3: 5). To say such a thing means it is no longer by grace. And not just no longer by grace, but to say so means one has fallen from grace (GAL. 5: 4). The Old Covenant is the Ten Commandments (EXO. 34: 28). And the Ten Commandments are NOT Spirit and they are NOT life, they are quite the opposite (2 COR. 3: 6-7). It is not by anything that we do that we are saved. God is not looking for us to have our own righteousness, which is from the law (PHP. 3: 9). It must be His righteousness (JOHN 6: 63). It MUST be by faith, and cannot be by the Old Covenant law (ROM. 3: 21; ROM. 4: 13; ROM. 9: 30-31; GAL. 2: 16). 

(GAL. 2: 21) "for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain." 

Am I saying the Old Testament is useless? Certainly not (2 TIM. 3: 15; I PET. 1: 10)! They are two parts of one book, and both very good for us to read and know (2 TIM. 3: 16-17; I COR. 10: 11). 

We've looked at what it is. Now, is there anything, any indicator, which may help us know who is being saved?

Yes. That indicator is our conduct (PHP. 1: 27-28; PHP 2: 12-13; HEB. 5: 9). I do not say that you must have works of faith and righteousness and therefore you will be saved. I say that if you have heard the truth, believed, and received the Spirit, then by that Spirit in you there will be works of faith and righteousness. It can be no other way. Works do not produce salvation, but they are evidence of it (JAS. 2: 17-18). Do not confuse "works" with "law"; they most certainly are not the same! We've already discussed the works of law. These are the works of faith James is talking about here. James is talking about the result of the faith, hope, and love inside you, through which you fulfill the whole law if you do these things (ROM. 13: 8-10; GAL. 5: 14; JAS 2: 8). Just as you will know a false prophet by his fruits (MATT. 7: 16, 20), those who have God's Spirit will be known by their fruits (MATT. 21: 43; PHP. 1: 11; JAS. 3: 17)

So it is not just in what you know. It is not in what man you follow. It's not in what law you keep, or Sabbath, or Holy Day. It's not in your flesh at all - but it is entirely about God and Christ (I COR. 12: 6; I COR. 15: 28; EPH. 1: 22-23; EPH. 4: 15-16; COL. 1: 18). These things are straight from the Bible and true, and need no speculation.

But if you really want a summation of the entire matter, here it is:

(JOHN 13: 35) By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another. 

The Two Babylons

Friends and fellows still in a Church of God, I would like to ask you to think through something with me. This is something that has troubled me for many years. I don't mean to trouble you, but to maybe show you something you may or may not have otherwise been aware of before now.

Have you heard of or read the book "The Two Babylons"? If you've heard of it, you know that it formed the base of Herbert Armstrong's interpretation of prophecy. If there is a foundation, in my opinion, that foundation is British-Israelism. The first layer built upon that foundation, as I see it, is The Two Babylons. 

If you are unfamiliar with the book (I don't see how that could be possible, but in the off chance) that is where the idea of the Catholic Church being 'Babylon the Great' came from. Other terms you may be familiar with came from there, such as "Babylonian Mystery Religion" and "Daughter Churches". See, the idea, in summation, is that the Catholic Church is not a Christian church at all, but is an ancient Babylonian pagan religion, started by Nimrod himself, filled with mystery rites and such which eventually incorporated some Christian ideas, and was the 'mother' of the Protestant churches. God supposedly calls it "the Great Harlot", and is supremely angry with the Pope and all of his followers direct and indirect. The Pope is the Little Horn of Daniel and is destined to become the False Prophet of Revelation. Hence the main reason why the COGs are so very much opposed to the Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches.

Enough overview... you get the idea. Those are very much core teachings in the xCOGs. I am personally only aware of one minister in all of the various splinters who does not base his prophetic interpretations on it.

Long story short(er), I wanted to ask if you personally believe this book to be inspired? If so, do you know why you believe so? 

Until a few years ago I believed the teachings to be inspired - but, then again, I hadn't read the book until a few years ago. When I read the book I noticed some strange things. 

Primarily, I noticed it made the entirety of prophecy about the Catholic Church (the negative stuff, anyway). How can the only "bad guy" in all of prophecy be the Catholic Church? It didn't add up. Here we are supposed to have a Beast power and a False Prophet, but the Pope is the 11th and most powerful horn of the Beast and the False Prophet at the same time? 

How can the Beast, owing its power to the Pope, hate the Catholic Church and burn it with fire (REV. 17: 16), yet the Beast and the Pope are both together at the end and thrown into the Lake of Fire together (REV. 19: 20)? How can Revelation 18: 23 be about the Catholic Church when it has no 'merchants'? Why does REV. 18: 11-19 say the merchants and shipmen weep over the Catholic Church; are the Catholics the only ones who buy the goods listed in verses 12 & 13?

These are just some of the questions I have asked. But more importantly, do you know who wrote "The Two Babylons"? His name was Alexander Hyslop. He first published a pamphlet in 1853, which he greatly expanded upon in 1858. Did you know that he was a Presbyterian minister? Now, I ask you to think about that with me for a minute here. If the Catholic Church is "the Great Harlot" and "Mother of Harlots", then all Protestant Churches are harlots, right? Doesn't that mean the Presbyterian church is a 'harlot' as well? Why is a Presbyterian minister, self-proclaimed minister of harlotry, writing an inspired work? Do you, as a practicing member of the Church of God, believe any work by Protestants to be inspired? Then how do you explain this? Please think that through in your mind for a bit.

I would have you know more about Alexander Hyslop. If he wrote his pamphlet in 1853, then he certainly did his research in the 1840's. Did you know that the city of Babylon lay buried in sand until 1899 when archaeologist Robert Koldewey began unearthing it? That was a half-century later! Did you know that according to the best information we have available today, Nimrod and Semiramis (his supposed mother and wife) didn't even live in the same century? Where, then did Hyslop get his information? Most of what he needed to make such in-depth analysis and far-reaching conclusions about ancient history was completely unavailable to him. How did he get anything he concluded then? By human reasoning within his own mind. Basically, he took numerology and ancient mythology and arrived at his own conclusions. 

One Mr. Ralph Woodrow, once a firm believer in and promoter of Hyslop, was challenged to prove what he held to. The result was a book entitled "The Babylon Connection". In it he shows how Hyslop was more than just mistaken - in some places he was fraudulently incorrect. That means he purposefully falsified information. Mr. Woodrow went back and read the books Hyslop supposedly based his theories on and concluded they most certainly do not support Hyslop. I suggest you read "The Babylon Connection".

For more information, see the Wikipedia article on The Two Babylons.

Will you, dearly loved by God, spend some serious meditation time on this? Will you consider that the truth cannot come from fraud? No fountain can give pure water and filth. And then will you humbly and soberly consider the nature of Mr. Herbert Armstrong who promoted Hyslop's