The following blog is by Ron Rubottom, a former Armstrongist and editor of the now defunct website “plaintruth.info”
Putting Armstrongism Away.
I am a former wwcg member from approx. 1985 to the nineties. (not exactly sure as confusion seemed to cloud my mind after the death of HWA. My experience is a bit different from many of you that grew up in the church or spent many years there. I should say that I appreciate the work you are doing. It is painful for me to see the allegations about HWA on your site, but even though today is the first inkling I have ever had of much of this, I can see that it is most likely accurate. I had already figured out on my own that he was deluded on certain subjects and greatly enjoyed the prestige and high life of his office but blamed others in my mind for encouraging his human nature. (Those like Gerald Waterhouse with his wild eyed predictions and numerology nonsense and carrying on about the prophetic significance of everything Armstrong) But, until today I did not think that he had consciously deceived us. A sad day.
I, unlike many of the victims testifying here, was raised SDA. In that cult we were taught that their prophetess, Ā Ellen G White, received direct revelations from God. She wrote 65 books and I grew up in Takoma Park, MD (world headquarters for the adventists) and my father (a second generation SDA) was a florist with his flower shop directly across the street from the Takoma Park SDA church AND directly across the street from the General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists (world headquarters) AND directly across the street from the Review and Herald publishing company. The world headquarters publishing company of the SDA’s.
I grew up in that flower shop. It had a huge Hallmark card section which brought in all the SDA employees and executives on a regular basis. I was well known and knew many of the leaders of the church. I placed the flowers in front of the podium every Sabbath morning. My dad taught Sabbath school. I was baptized several times. I sang solos in front of hundreds. I attended SDA schools and studied the bible and Ellen White daily. I took it all quite seriously. I read most of EG Whites books and believed all they said. My family and I sat front and center in the Takoma Park church every Sabbath.
I was an intellectual child in spite of my devotion to the “truth”. The sermons were usually incredibly boring and all I had to read were the church hymnal and the Bible. After wearing out the hymnal to escape the boredom I began reading the old testament. The kings and such historical parts were pretty boring to me and the psalms didn’t do anything for me and then I discovered Solomon’s writings. I read about how Solomon choose wisdom and understanding over all else, when offered anything he desired, and was thrilled by that. In my childish innocence, I was about twelve, I bowed my head right there and prayed for the same things. Whether or not there is a God or if he answers prayers, this is a powerful thing.
After that I began reading Isaiah and other latter prophets and trying to figure out what in the world they were talking about! In SDA doctrine we never heard anything about a peaceful world, only heaven and lakes of fire. I began questioning ministers in the church and because of my family’s position I was able to question the higher up’s and talk to Ellen White’s heirs and others the average member did not have access to. I was given the usual double speak and told the the unconditional promises of the old testament and the prophecies of a peaceful just world were the “way it would have been if Israel had obeyed God.” They had convinced me that the Bible was God’s word so they laid the groundwork for my rejection of the church. Eventually the “White Lie” came out. (The facts the Ellen White copied much or all of her writings from earlier protestant writers, how easy it was to get away with before the internet!)
I was through, and extremely angry. I was really pissed off for years, but had not lost my faith in the Bible as the word of God so was easy pickings for WWCG. When I first heard HWA in the 80’s I had to drive to the top of a mountain in WV where I was living to get the station clearly. The reason I did was because what he was saying finally made sense of all the things I had read in Isaiah and elsewhere and never could make any sense of. JW’s were too weird so I couldn’t get it from them. HWA made sense of it and I determined to disprove him because of the deception I had experienced with EG White. I read every scripture he quoted and the context on either side of it to disprove what he was teaching and found that he was teaching scripturally sound doctrine. (I was used to total inexplicable fantasies like most protestant religions use).
The more I tried to prove him wrong, the more I proved him scripturally correct. I was hooked, line and sinker. I dragged my family along and joined the church. Gave them a lot of money just like the rest of you. I am now divorced and I can’t say it is the fault of the church but I am not sure. Our life was significantly altered and it is possible that the church life prevented us from developing a healthy relationship. I generally blame myself but don’t we all, and not necessarily correctly. I guess I am rambling on but it is such a relief to find a group of folks that have some similar experiences.
For years I have wanted to get in touch with former members that were with us through all that but could not find them as I had moved away and left the church. Couldn’t help but wonder what their thoughts and experiences were since the dissolution of the church, the Joseph T debacle and all. Didn’t even know about all this HWA stuff but it makes sense now in retrospect. I have read most every page on your site today and I have noticed that there are multiple “moderators” and some seem to be atheistic or at least agnostic, while others seem to be somewhat still open to scripture being possibly authentic.
I admire the attitude of all here and cannot begin to understand what some of you experienced in the old days before standards were somewhat relaxed as they were in my time in the church. I do have a clue though. Because of all that I have been through I have been compelled to write out my thoughts and beliefs and to publish them online in the delusional imagination that I understood all as I prayed for at 12. I had a site called the plain truth.info for a few years. This exercise taught me a lot and writing out your thoughts and beliefs is a great way to examine your beliefs as I found myself constantly having to correct myself.
To me the conclusions that I derived from this several year exercise has been helpful and comforting. I don’t know if it would be of any interest or profit to anyone but it has been to me and so I include it here just in case.
I could not let go of the belief that the Scripture was inspired, (a teaching I received in the SDA church that led me to leave it) only that I had been fooled again. In the WWCG I had finally been able to understand all the things that drove me crazy in the SDA in the “inspired” word. I realized that HWA was somewhat deceived and that the WWCG was not the “TRUE CHURCH.” I did not, of course know the rest of the story. After Joe Tkach I left in disgust. It’s funny, the teachings of the SDA’s caused me to disbelieve them, AND the teachings of HWA caused me to disbelieve him too.
In my analysis on my plain truth site I first reasoned that belief systems were choices that serve us or not and that none of them are provable. Creationist, atheist, or whatever is you choose, you can’t prove it’s true. It’s just your choice and as an automatic side effect of your choice you MUST discredit/disprove (to your satisfaction) opposing views. I chose the belief that was hammered into me, that scripture was inspired BUT, I had actually been thinking for myself for some time and came to a different view than I have seen expressed anywhere else.
1. “Scripture” means the Hebrew “old testament”. That was what Christ said could not be broken.
2. The “new testament” was canonized by the Catholic church but has been accepted as “the word of God” by virtually all groups, even those (such as the WWCG) that see the Catholic church as the Great Whore. It seems that it never crosses anyone’s mind to question the validity of this document and every word, especially Paul’s, is given reverence as God’s utterances. This is plainly naive.
At best, if we can trust that the works are genuine, the four “gospels” are not “scripture” they are eyewitness accounts and hearsay of the life and acts of Christ as recalled by his companions/disciples. Then we have Acts, purportedly written by Mark which is just a documentary of events. After that until Revelation, we have the “epistles” which are personal letters from the apostles to churches with their advice, admonitions, and sometimes personal opinions and specific instructions or advice to individuals and groups. I can’t imagine that when they wrote these letters to their congregations that they envisioned this “Christianity” that has evolved placing their correspondence on the same level as the prophets of old, and calling it “the word of God”
Then finally comes “The Revelation of Jesus Christ” purported to be dictated to and written down by the beloved apostle John. If we can believe that this is genuine it would be the only part of the “new testament” that qualified as “scripture” as it would be the only part that was received in the manner that we are told the prophets of old did. i.e. a direct dictation session from God, which is the premise that we are asked to accept from the old testament scriptures. Ok, sorry going tangent.
3.I/we learned in wwcg the Biblically correct teaching that Christ hid the truth from the masses. (“why do you speak to them in parables”….”because to you it is given to know the secrets of the KOG but to them it is not given…) so we knew that according to what we believed that evangelism was not Christ’s agenda. There is no need to convince or convert anyone as God’s “church” is just a group chosen to serve mankind in the age to come. So, no pressure I reason. It makes no difference what anyone believes and there is no reason for a church that recruits members and solicits money from them for what?
My conclusions include that all of Christianity is false BS and that God if he exists has no religion and that religion is the curse of the earth and that one possible explanation for our existence is the plan outlined in the Scriptures. It would be the obvious conclusion that I choose that belief because I was taught it as a child. I have rejected much of what I was taught as a child. I think that the reason I hold to this choice of beliefs is because it makes sense that God is creating a family and that the only way he could do it was by allowing, or actually causing, us to experience the consequences of living in a selfish, non-loving world and seeing the horror of living outside of God’s law of love.
I know it’s sophomoric but as Christ pointed out the whole law can be summed up in two commands, love God and love your brother. We don’t need any commandments if we love. Thanks Beatles. When money and power come into the picture is when all people, who are basically good, run a-muck. The love of money and power has consumed so many. (money is power) HWA loved his power and prestige it seems. You always hear (when people visit some third world country where the population is dirt poor) “the people were so sweet and kind and beautiful! I never in my life met such kind, good people. Yes, because they have no access to the “root of all evil” (oh no, I just quoted PAUL!
Brilliant, smart, clever, shrewd, cunning, witty, sophisticated, precise, complex, accurate — you can be all of those things and more. You may be highly educated with an M.B.A. from Harvard, a PhD in Nuclear Physics from M.I.T., an Aeronautical Engineer from Princeton and / or a whole host of other credentials. You might be an experienced and highly regarded linguist, archeologist, astronomer, Corporate Director / Vice President, historian, nutritionist, Medical Doctor, Lawyer, C.P.A, Network Engineer, automotive designer or working in a whole host of other careers.
Last week, I interviewed with Boeing at the Aeronautical Engineering Division where jets are engineered to fly. It’s complex and engineers are treated well — they are respected professionals and their time is highly valued. I’ve known any number of people in the WCG and United who have worked at Boeing and even IBM. One engineer I knew designed the Boeing 737 autopilot. He went to retire, but Boeing kept calling him back to work on it up to the age of 75 years old. I’ve met a man in the church who actually writes assembly language code for started tasks on the IBM Mainframe z/OS environment. He designed and wrote an interface to an artificial package which was bought by IBM. The IMS team shipped him over the code to use as a pattern. He quickly noted that the IMS started tasks had a fatal error and showed them how to fix it, before he went on with his own work.
There have been any number of brilliant people in the Armstrongist churches of God.
It doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t mean a thing.
God only reveals his truth to His Apostles and Evangelist leaders in the cult of Armstrongism.
Nothing you say has any credibility.
No matter what facts, data, truth, witnesses you may bring to the table, if you disagree with the Cultmeister over you, you are rebellious, know nothing and have no status or standing to say anything.
It does not matter if you can absolutely prove beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt six ways from Sunday that British Israelism is a steaming pile of horse manure.
It does not matter if you can absolutely prove that church history is fabricated and there is no such thing as eras.
It does not matter if you can absolutely prove there is no such thing as second tithe.
Your job is to be lied to and provide the money: Only The Leader matters and you are wrong and nothing, no matter what.
At Stage 1, it is assumed the dissenter just doesn’t know any better and is amenable to “rational” discussion. Some of the arguments you’ll her:
“It’ll never work.“
“The boss will never go for it.“
“It’s not what we do around here.“
“Things are okay as they are.“
Stage 2: Listening But Not Hearing
If the dissenter persists in his wrong-headed view, things stay polite but subtle messages are sent.
“Yes, we’ve heard from you on that. Anybody else got some different ideas?“
“Thanks for your contribution.“
“Maybe you should put that in writing so we all have a good idea of what you mean.“
Stage 3: Laughing It Off
Before they hit this stage, most team players are astute enough to realize they need to tone down their advocacy. But those who don’t get it begin to get teased about their persistence.
“This is a real hobbyhorse, isn’t it? When are you going to get off and give somebody else a chance to ride?“
“If you’re so smart, how come you ain’t rich?“
“Can I give you a quarter to phone somebody who cares?“
You note that nowhere are people talking about the real issues — like how inconvenient, threatening, or difficult it will be to implement the dissenter’s idea. Often, it’s because the idea is inconvenient, threatening, or difficult that this whole process gets invoked to begin with. It is at this point that the focus moves from the dissenter’s ideas to the dissenter himself [the ad hominem argument]. It stops being about whether the idea makes sense and starts being about the dissenter’s personality flaws.
Stage 4: Ignoring
If ridicule doesn’t work, the powers-that-be start to get a little ticked. Although they’d never say it, they’re beginning to feel that if the dissenter had any sensitivity or even manners, he’d stop bothering them. They bring into play one of the most powerful weapons–silence. When the dissenter speaks, no one replies; the conversation continues as if he had never spoken. If he persists, he gets:
“We’ve been over that ground before. I was looking for new ideas.“
“I don’t think we’ll get to your item today. Maybe next time.“
While in the previous stage people kept their expressions carefully neutral, now nonverbal cues are more evident. Rolling eyeballs and sighs are prominent.
Stage 5: Making Invisible
Still some people don’t get it. They persist despite the increasingly unfriendly environment. The heat is turned up. Not only will the boss refuse to engage in further discussion but also funny things start to happen. Somehow, the dissenter’s name gets left off distribution lists. Invitations to important meetings aren’t forthcoming. Decisions are taken without his input. It’s as if he has disappeared.
Stage 6: Forbidding
Some dissenters won’t take their invisibility lying down. Then the big guns come out. If the dissenter continues to push his unpopular views, someone will finally drag him into a room and say:
“You are to focus on assigned projects, not just on the ones you want to do.“
“Stop wasting other people’s time by pushing your pet project.“
“I forbid you to work on that idea.“
Sanctions may or may not be threatened. If the dissenter has taken the issue this far, he may see his fight as a matter of principle. Backing down would be a comment on him, on his integrity. But equally, the boss has had it, and the idea the dissenter has will be implemented only over several dead bodies.
Stage 7: Getting Rid of the Dissenter
If the situation gets to this stage, war has been declared and both sides are focused not on what’s good for the company but on winning. And, just given the way of the world, the power is on the side of the higher-ups. If the dissenter ignores the previous injunctions, any number of things can happen.
“I don’t think your skills are up to this position. There’s a job for paper-pusher in Division M.“
“You need to report through Bob now. He’ll vet any of your ideas.“
“Somebody has to be laid off. I regret it has to be you.“
“We don’t have a place for you in this organization.“
For those of us who have read The Ambassador Reports, this is all too familiar — since it was standard practice in the WCG in Pasadena and Big Sandy Texas and is the methodology of the GCI. Of course, it goes on within the rest of the Armstrongists, all the way from Arguing to Disfellowshipment. This doesn’t always work out, as United might be able to tell you, having lost at least 40 congregations in ten years (we’ve lost count, sorry) to the split with the Church of God, Worldwide Association. With Weinland and his PKG group, he seems to alternate between laughing it off and ignoring the dissidents — the only problem is, he’s about to be sentenced, so whatever he does probably has very impact on the dissenters except to make them more determined to expose him for the fraud he is.
All the people in the Living Church of God under Roderick Meredith need to perform the following experiment: Gather your facts and go to him to prove once and for all that British Israelism is nonsense, church history is a fraud and that he is a false prophet. You might even be a Pastor ranked minister or a Regional Pastor. You know, he’s the legacy from Herbert Armstrong who said, “Prove us wrong and we will change”. Of course, you need to keep firmly in mind that Roderick Meredith has proclaimed that he has not committed a major sin since his baptism, so be certain to document in writing the major sins he has committed to show them to him. Then stand back and see how quickly he runs through the seven stages.
One of the more, shall we say, colorful, of the gurus which sprang forth from the high school dropout with just an eighth grade education, turned Chancellor of a College, Herbert Armstrong is Yisrayl Hawkins. It’s interesting to see his former wife’s book, The House of Yahweh: My Side of the Story by Kay Hawkins is treated at Amazon.com. A comment by James A. Schmelig says: “Now that you’re read the obviously biased hand wringing of a woman scorned, maybe you would like to read the most authoritative investigative report about The House of Yahweh ever published. It is titled “The House of Yahweh EXPOSED! – Saints or Sinister?” by James Arthur. When we look upĀ The House of Yahweh EXPOSED! – Saints or Sinister?, we spend so many pages looking at how corrupt the United States government is and how the truth has been covered up, until we find that James Arthur is actually for Yisrayl Hawkins. We also learn that The House of Yahweh started in the Garden of Eden. The author also tells us a bit about himself: A former (?) alcoholic (no such thing), drug abuser, liar, thief, sexual degenerate, despot, convicted felon and ex-convict who spent 10 years in prison by the time he was 28 years old. (Page 215) He tried the shallow superficial dogma of Christianity, but (darn it all!) Yisrayl Hawkins brought him the light and reformed him! Of course, Yisrayl “Buffalo Bill” Hawkins is a proven false prophet, not unlike Ronald Weinland. He did, however, write his own version of Scripture, The Book of Yahwey. Many reviewers question the source of the translation and not a few reject the book as being heretical. One reviewer noted how many references were changed in favor of polygamy.
The issue here is how people are silenced and certainly the comment,Ā “Now that you’re read the obviously biased hand wringing of a woman scorned…” is designed to question the credibility of someone who actually lived with the cult leader.
Armstrongism is based on silencing visionaries, dissenters and troublemakers, because Armstrongism itself is based on lies, deceptions, weirdness (the favorite of which is the guy who claims demons are coming to earth through a stargate at the bottom of the ocean), insanity (Richard Brothers who invented British Israelism was in an insane asylum because he was a danger to others) cast by narcissists, sociopaths, psychopaths and nutjobs. Yet, they expect us to swallow their Flavorade with a straight face.
In the book, Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work, authors Dr. Paul Babiak and Dr. Robert Hare answer the question, “What is the difference between a sociopath and psychopath” beginning on Page 19:
PsychopathsĀ are without conscience and incapable of empathy, guilt,Ā or loyalty to anyone but themselves.
Sociopaths may have a well-developed conscience and a normalĀ capacity for empathy, guilt, and loyalty, but their sense of right andĀ wrong is based on the norms and expectations of their subcultureĀ or group.
In other words, sociopaths have what is known as a “conditional conscience” based on the beliefs of those with whom they associate. The best example of this is the Mafia, where the behavior toward members of the group is far different — and the expectations are far different — than from the rest of the world: You can lie, steal, cheat, murder in order to advance the cause of your group, but not to those in the hierarchy within the group. As a Mafia Don, people were loyal to Herbert Armstrong and it was fine for both he and the members of the WCG to lie, steal, cheat and practice deception as long as the goal was to advance the WCG. The ministry was indoctrinated with “the end justifies the means” ethic (which is no ethic at all), so by implication, most of the Worldwide Church of God and the Armstrongist churches of God is basically populated by sociopaths, with the exception of the narcissists, psychopaths and nutjobs which occupy various levels within the hierarchy. Nothing matters except to protect the viability of the organization (which has no socially redeeming qualities within itself). All dissenters will be dealt with in the manner revealed by Frances Horibe. If you don’t believe that, just try dissenting and see what happens.
Those who leave Armstrongism need to be very much aware that their conscience has become warped and twisted in ways to adapt to the nature of the thinking of Herbert Armstrong. You’ve been adapted to accept injustices which would not be acceptable to the normal ordinary member of the rest of society because you have become a sociopath with antisocial behavior: You are looking for the end of the world, the destruction of society and, in most cases, have come to believe that people in terrible circumstances out in the world must attend to the dead burying their dead. You’ve been conditioned to do absolutely nothing but stand by, watching the horrors of others in your life, waiting for Jesus Christ to return to fix everything. You’ve accepted the idea that even if you could do something about it, you won’t because you feel that it’s just not your job. As Robert Dick in the United Church of God, an International Association said, “This is not the time of justice”. And folks, he also means it as far as the church is concerned. You have a conscience that was not bothered by false prophets spouting false prophecies and you have been satisfied to just sit back and prove exactly nothing. You take your cult leader’s word for it. You march on as a loyal soldier in your cult and never question your General, whether it is the Pastor General, Coordinator General or General kook leader, no matter how corrupt and wrong he is — up to and including becoming a convicted felon. If you know of a crime committed by a minister or you Leader, your job is to cover it up, ignore it and act as if it is normal.
It will take a very long time to construct a valid conscience, if it is even possible.
So you can be brilliant, smart, clever, shrewd, cunning, witty, sophisticated, precise, complex, accurate, but not within the confines of the craziness of the Armstrongist cult. They will find ways to make you submissive, for example, they will tangibly lower your IQ by making you feel stupid. Research has shown that the IQ of people can be lowered by as much as 40 points by convincing people they are stupid — and the Armstrongists certainly do a good job of that. They have these secret wonderful “truths” (lies) to which the world is not privy — which means that you are a novice when you take up with them to enter into their ranks: Nothing you say, do or are means anything, because the leadership has all the truth and your vision, perspectives and knowledge is irrelevant. You can’t know the truth. It is only revealed to the incompetent false prophet End Time Apostle. Only when you realize this and become nothing more that a stupid drone can you become someone.
Armstrongists should have quit while they were ahead: They should have just quietly withdrawn all the fabricated church history and simply admitted that the Sabbath keeping churches of God from which the Radio Church of God and later, the Worldwide Church of God, sprang from Gilbert CranmerĀ who was the acknowledged founder of the Church of God Seventh Day. He came, with others, out of the Great Disappointment of 1844, which was part of the Advent Movement but at the time, was not based in the Sabbath — the Sabbath keeping came afterward.
But the Armstrongists wanted legitimacy and what better way to establish it than by claiming that their own founder, Herbert Armstrong, was from a direct line of ordained men, reaching back through time to the very Apostles of the Christian church in the First Century A.D.? There is no such chain and no legitimate way of establishing it using history because the facts simply won’t support an unbroken line through the centuries. At best, there seems to be pockets of target Christians in small groups with less than credible history which could be strung together in fiction fantasy fashion to create the illusion of what was needed to establish legitimacy. They were ably helped by plagiarizing a church history from Dugger and Dodd who had plagiarized it from none other than Ellen G. White, who turned out to be something of a nut case. Gilbert Cranmer was not at all impressed by her and her husband who had founded the Seventh Day Adventists and attempted to rule over all the Christian Sabbath keepers in the United States at the time:
Ā …elder Cranmer then wrote to Battle Creek and requested a decision as to whether they considered him a minister, and as to his right to preach among them. The result of their conclusion in the matter was that they refused him the privilege of preaching to them or for them for the reason that he did not hold the visions of Ellen G. White to be inspired. Mr. Leighton said in our presence that the visions were inspired, that they were better than the Bible because they were warm and fresh from the throne of God, and that anyone who did not accept them as inspiration absolutely would be damned. The visions were made a test of fellowship from that time.
E.G. White was inspired, but not of God.
Here is Gilbert Cranmer’s letter published in The Hope of Israel, August 10th, 1863:
About ten years ago [1853] a Seventh-day Adventist minister, by the name of [Joseph] Bates, came to our town and advocated the whole Law, the gifts of the Spirit, and many other glorious truths. The gifts belonging to the Church, I had believed in for over twenty years. Hence I felt to rejoice, supposing I had found the people I had been so long looking for. He told me that the gifts were realized among them, that they had the gift of prophecy and the gift of healing the sick. But as long as I was with them I never knew of any being healed. I have known them to try but they always failed. In this I was disappointed. I also found the spirit of prophecy, with them, was confined wholly to a woman. By this time I became suspicious that I had gotten on board the wrong ship. I then commenced to giving her visions a thorough investigation. I found they contradicted themselves, and that they contradicted the Bible. My doubts concerning the visions I made known to the brethren. At once they gave me the cold shoulder, and I was held at bay. Not knowing any people I could unite with, I remained with them for years, hoping they would get sick of the visions of E.G. White, and that we could yet walk together in unity of spirit. But instead of rejecting them, as I hoped they would, they only drew the reins the tighter. At last I made up my mind I would not belong to a church that was ruled by a woman any longer. From that time the Bible has been my creed, with Christ at the head of the Church. I started alone, with my Bible in my hand. God has blessed my labors beyond my utmost expectations. We have some eight ministers and some hundreds of members in the state of Michigan. God has manifest His power among us in a wonderful manner.
Gilbert Cranmer [founder of the Church of God (seventh day)]Ā
It should be noted that the Church of God Seventh Day, Denver Conference, does not have nor does it support the theoretical church history in an unbroken line from the time of Jesus Christ on this earth: They know very well that no claim can be made, other than Gilbert Cranmer was the founder of the Church of God Seventh Day, began the Hope of Israel which later became the Bible Advocate, which has been around for 150 years or so now. [It should also be noted that while the Armstrongist churches are splintering and dividing, the Church of God Seventh Day is growing and has more members than the largest splinter of the Armstrongist movement today.] They know where they came from. The Armstrongists, on the other hand, don’t seem to want to know that they are heretics with a proven rebellious false prophet that came out of the Church of God Seventh Day with stupid ridiculous disproved ideas as British Israelism and church history — both and either of which completely disavows and overthrows any claim to being a legitimate. For those who are supposedly seeking the truth and even claiming, “Prove us wrong and we will change”, this is supremely ironic. No claim to the truth can be made as Armstrongist leaders, founders and ministers gloss over proof of their deceptions and strive to cover up the lies, particularly so their members cannot gain a foothold on the truth, so they can continue with their salaries, bolster their egos and claim retirement when they feel the time is right.
Instead of the truth, Armstrongists have fabricated the insane notion of Church Eras, unsupported by any legitimate history, manufacturing and warping ideas out of thin air. The whole silly idea of church Eras comes from their interpretation of Revelation 2 and Revelation 3, and then mapped against dubious unsupported history of obscure groups, some of whom are known never to have kept either the Sabbath or Holydays. There are supposedly seven Eras: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodocea. As opposed to being church Eras, the fact is that these were Gentile churches in Greece on a mail route. The Apostle John apparently wrote the book of Revelation (which was to be the Revelation of Jesus ChristĀ to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass). If we read Revelation and take it for just what it says in the first three chapters, this epistle is written to the seven churches in Asia Minor to show them what was going to happen in their lifetime (which must shortly come to pass). Immediately we have a problem here because this is a book of, shall we say, limited vision, at least in the first three chapters. Indeed, if we look at the history of each of the cities in question, we see that the predictions did indeed come to pass against these cities (more or less). Laodocea was certainly most striking with its decline and fall.
But Herbert Armstrong and Dr. Herman L. Hoeh determined to make it seem that the Radio Church of God was the one and only true church from which no one could escape if they were to attain salvation, so they “borrowed” plagiarized materials, often copied word for word, to “prove” their legitimacy and make it very uncomfortable for anyone to ever even consider leaving the fold held together by the Great False Prophet. They had a lot to lose if the membership didn’t buy it. Therefore, they libeled and slandered the Church of God Seventh Day saying it was Sardis and had a name that it lived but was dead. If there were any truth to that, we would say that the Living Church of God is Sardis, because it has a name that it is Living, but under Roderick Meredith, it is quite dead, replete with dead works. Next, Armstrong / Hoeh (who was the first to declare Herbert Armstrong an apostle), declared that the Radio Church of God was the favored Philadelphian era. This is the sweet spot of the church eras, for there is nothing bad that Revelation has to say against them except to hold fast to the good things they already have. The truth is a lot more ugly. Then there are those damned (no, we really mean it — damned!) Laodoceans who are rich and increased in goods, think they have need of nothing (seeing as how they have the Sabbath and Holydays), but are poor, blind and naked. If that doesn’t describe the Worldwide Church of God under Herbert Armstrong, we just don’t know what would.
Evidence for Eras by the Eternal Church of God is a typical Armstrongist foray into the Era argument fray with statements like:
One of the main traits of true believers is keeping the Ten Commandments. This the Waldenses did, including the seventh-day Sabbath. Some have argued that these people did not keep the Sabbath, but a number of historians document their seventh day observance.
What they don’t tell you is that “Sabbath” in some cases of the “historians document” refers to Sunday — viewed by Catholics as the Sabbath (having been changed from the Seventh Day by the Catholics because of Easter). Another thing they won’t tell you is that Peter Waldo and his followers never kept the Seventh Day Sabbath and the Holydays, but rather considered themselves good Roman Catholics who were concerned about how secular the Catholic Church had become. If they had bothered to contact the modern day Waldensians, the authors would have found that the Waldensians themselves never kept the Sabbath, in Peter Waldo’s time were Roman Catholics and became Protestants. The “documentation” presented is bogus, misleading and an outright deception — which they cover up by saying “Some have argued that these people did not keep the Sabbath” including the Waldensians themselves. Moreover, some of the 700+ Armstrongist cults even go so far that Sabbath keeping Waldensians kept the Sabbath and the Holydays centuries before Peter Waldo! This is tantamount to insisting that Scientologists were extant during Sir Isaac Newton’s time before L. Ron Hubbard because he was a scientist… or at least a mathematician.
In lands beyond the jurisdiction of Rome there existed for many centuries bodies of Christians who remained almost wholly free from papal corruption. They were surrounded by heathenism and in the lapse of ages were affected by its errors; but they continued to regard the Bible as the only rule of faith and adhered to many of its truths. These Christians believed in the perpetuity of the law of God and observed the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. Churches that held to this faith and practice existed in Central Africa and among the Armenians of Asia.
But of those who resisted the encroachments of the papal power, the Waldenses stood foremost. In the very land where popery had fixed its seat, there its falsehood and corruption were most steadfastly resisted. For centuries the churches of Piedmont maintained their independence; but the time came at last when Rome insisted upon their submission. After ineffectual struggles against her tyranny, the leaders of these churches reluctantly acknowledged the supremacy of the power to which the whole world seemed to pay homage. There were some, however, who refused to yield to the authority of pope or prelate. They were determined to maintain their allegiance to God and to preserve the purity and simplicity of their faith. A separation took place. Those who adhered to the ancient faith now withdrew; some, forsaking their native Alps, raised the banner of truth in foreign lands; others retreated to the secluded glens and rocky fastnesses of the mountains, and there preserved their freedom to worship God.
The faith which for centuries was held and taught by the Waldensian Christians was in marked contrast to the false doctrines put forth from Rome. Their religious belief was founded upon the written word of God, the true system of Christianity. But those humble peasants, in their obscure retreats, shut away from the world, and bound to daily toil among their flocks and their vineyards, had not by themselves arrived at the truth in opposition to the dogmas and heresies of the apostate church. Theirs was not a faith newly received. Their religious belief was their inheritance from their fathers. They contended for the faith of the apostolic church,–“the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” Jude 3. “The church in the wilderness,” and not the proud hierarchy enthroned in the world’s great capital, was the true church of Christ, the guardian of the treasures of truth which God has committed to His people to be given to the world.
Among the leading causes that had led to the separation of the true church from Rome was the hatred of the latter toward the Bible Sabbath. As foretold by prophecy, the papal power cast down the truth to the ground. The law of God was trampled in the dust, while the traditions and customs of men were exalted. The churches that were under the rule of the papacy were early compelled to honor the Sunday as a holy day. Amid the prevailing error and superstition, many, even of the true people of God, became so bewildered that while they observed the Sabbath, they refrained from labor also on the Sunday. But this did not satisfy the papal leaders. They demanded not only that Sunday be hallowed, but that the Sabbath be profaned; and they denounced in the strongest language those who dared to show it honor. It was only by fleeing from the power of Rome that any could obey God’s law in peace.
The Waldenses were among the first of the peoples of Europe to obtain a translation of the Holy Scriptures. Hundreds of years before the Reformation they possessed the Bible in manuscript in their native tongue. They had the truth unadulterated, and this rendered them the special objects of hatred and persecution. They declared the Church of Rome to be the apostate Babylon of the Apocalypse, and at the peril of their lives they stood up to resist her corruptions. While, under the pressure of long-continued persecution, some compromised their faith, little by little yielding its distinctive principles, others held fast the truth. Through ages of darkness and apostasy there were Waldenses who denied the supremacy of Rome, who rejected image worship as idolatry, and who kept the true Sabbath. Under the fiercest tempests of opposition they maintained their faith. Though gashed by the Savoyard spear, and scorched by the Romish fagot, they stood unflinchingly for God’s word and His honor.
There it is: Ellen G. White started the lie, Dugger and Dodd continued it and it was carried along by Herbert Armstrong.
It is a lie. The Armstrongists have known it is a lie since 1990 when I went to the library on campus at the University of Washington in Seattle and did research on John Trask (you don’t want to know — it’s too embarrassing!) and the Waldensians and sent the information to the Worldwide Church of God which they sidewise acknowledged in their magazine (we know it isn’t true, but we want to believe it anyway!). It’s been two decades and they haven’t changed their tired old deceptions. Others have done the research as well. They know. They just won’t acknowledge it because it destroys their legitimacy, leaving people no particularly good reason to believe a word they say or to stay with them to endure their insane heresies and false prophets.
Since you won’t acknowledge the truth because you believe that we will just go away and we can’t do anything to make you acknowledge the truth or take accountability, we, at the Painful Truth, have a new challenge for you which you would do well NOT to ignore. Instead of just making sure your congregants don’t bother to question you faux church history, you will have a newer, much bigger concern to address.
Now it is a case that one of your former ministers, Dennis Diehl, has called you on this and you have found it convenient to ignore him when he talks about the division between the Apostle Paul and Peter and divisions with the other Apostles, especially with John and James opposing them all and Dennis even casting aspersions on Jesus Christ more than suggesting that he was a Myth or rather Mithra. The Apostle Paul doesn’t seem to know about the virgin birth and neither does the Gospel writer Mark. Dennis seems to think that the Apostle Paul actually created Christianity from a whole cloth where it never existed before.
In the fourth century, the Roman Emperor Constantine united all religious factions under one composite deity, and ordered the compilation of new and old writings into a uniform collection that became the New Testament.
The information Tony Bushby provides comes straight from the Roman Catholic Church in the Catholic Encyclopedia. It is widely acknowledged that the Catholic Church preserved the New Testament. What no wants to acknowledge is that apparently the Roman Catholic Church created the New Testament. Here is a partial account of happened in the context of the Council of Nicaea:
Constantine’s intention at Nicaea wasĀ to create an entirely new god for his empire who would unite all religiousĀ factions under one deity. PresbytersĀ were asked to debate and decide whoĀ their new god would be. DelegatesĀ argued among themselves, expressingĀ personal motives for inclusion ofĀ particular writings that promoted theĀ finer traits of their own special deity.Ā Throughout the meeting, howlingĀ factions were immersed in heatedĀ debates, and the names of 53 gods wereĀ tabled for Ā discussion. “As yet, no GodĀ had been selected by the council, and soĀ they balloted in order to determine that matter… For one year andĀ five months the balloting lasted…” (God’s Book of Eskra, Prof. S.Ā L. MacGuire’s translation, Salisbury, 1922, chapter xlviii,Ā paragraphs 36, 41).
At the end of that time, Constantine returned to the gathering toĀ discover that the presbyters had not agreed on a new deity but hadĀ balloted down to a shortlist of five prospects: Caesar, Krishna,Ā Mithra, Horus and Zeus (Historia Ecclesiastica, Eusebius, c.Ā 325). Constantine was the ruling spirit at Nicaea and heĀ ultimately decided upon a new god for them. To involve BritishĀ factions, he ruled that the name of the great Druid god, Hesus, beĀ joined with the Eastern Saviour-god, Krishna (Krishna is SanskritĀ for Christ), and thus Hesus Krishna would be the official name ofĀ the new Roman god. A vote was taken and it was with a majorityĀ show of hands (161 votes to 157) that both divinities became oneĀ God. Following longstanding heathen custom, Constantine usedĀ the official gathering and the Roman apotheosis decree to legallyĀ deify two deities as one, and did so by democratic consent. AĀ new god was proclaimed and “officially” ratified by ConstantineĀ (Acta Concilii Nicaeni , 1618). That purely political act ofĀ deification effectively and legally placed Hesus and KrishnaĀ among the Roman gods as one individual composite. ThatĀ abstraction lent Earthly existence to amalgamated doctrines forĀ the Empire’s new religion; and because there was no letter “J” inĀ alphabets until around the ninth century, the name subsequentlyĀ evolved into “Jesus Christ”.
Ā Constantine instructed his representative, Eusebius to organize the compilation of new writings developed from primary aspects of religious texts: Keep the good and throw out the bad. Fifty copies were prepared. The New Testimonies would thereafter be called the “Word of Roman Savior God”. It’s always good to get your state religion straight and in order. The Roman Catholic Church knew of all of this:
The Church hierarchy knows the truth about the origin of itsĀ Epistles, for Cardinal Bembo (d. 1547), secretary to Pope Leo X (d.Ā 1521), advised his associate, Cardinal Sadoleto, to disregard them,Ā saying “put away these trifles, for such absurdities do not become aĀ man of dignity; they were introduced on the scene later by a slyĀ voice from heaven” (Cardinal Bembo: His Letters and CommentsĀ on Pope Leo X, A. L. Collins, London, 1842 reprint).
The Church admits that the Epistles of Paul are forgeries, saying,Ā “Even the genuine Epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weightĀ to the personal views of their authors” ( Catholic Encyclopedia,Ā Farley ed., vol. vii, p. 645). Likewise, St Jerome (d. 420) declaredĀ that the Acts of the Apostles, the fifth book of the New Testament,Ā was also “falsely written” (“The Letters of Jerome”, Library of theĀ Fathers, Oxford Movement, 1833ā45, vol. v, p. 445).
A copy of the Sinai Bible was discovered in the 19th Century and was verified to have been compiled around 380 A.D. and shows positively that most of the New Testament is a forgery:
When the New Testament in the Sinai Bible is compared with aĀ modern-day New Testament, a staggering 14,800 editorialĀ alterations can be identified. These amendments can beĀ recognised by a simple comparative exercise that anybody canĀ and should do. Serious study of Christian origins must emanateĀ from the Sinai Bible’s version of the New Testament, not modernĀ editions.
Of importance is the fact that the Sinaiticus carries threeĀ Gospels since rejected: the Shepherd of Hermas (written by twoĀ resurrected ghosts, Charinus and Lenthius), the Missive ofĀ Barnabas and the Odes of Solomon. Space excludes elaborationĀ on these bizarre writings and also discussion on dilemmasĀ associated with translation variations.
Modern Bibles are five removes in translation from earlyĀ editions, and disputes rage between translators over variantĀ interpretations of more than 5,000 ancient words. However, it isĀ what is not written in that old Bible that embarrasses the Church,Ā and this article discusses only a few of those omissions. One Ā glaring example is subtly revealed in the Encyclopaedia BiblicaĀ (Adam & Charles Black, London, 1899, vol. iii, p. 3344), whereĀ the Church divulges its knowledge about exclusions in old Bibles,Ā saying: “The remark has long ago and often been made that, likeĀ Paul, even the earliest Gospels knew nothing of the miraculousĀ birth of our Saviour”. Ā That is because there never was a virginĀ birth.
Ā The Catholic Church can’t reconcile the New Testament with any kind of certainty:
Despite a multitude of long-drawn-out self-justifications byĀ Church apologists, there is no unanimity of Christian opinionĀ regarding the non-existence of “resurrection” appearances inĀ ancient Gospel accounts of the story. Not only are thoseĀ narratives missing in the Sinai Bible, but they are absent in theĀ Alexandrian Bible, the Vatican Bible, the Bezae Bible and anĀ ancient Latin manuscript of Mark, code-named “K” by analysts.Ā They are also lacking in the oldest Armenian version of the NewĀ Testament, in sixth-century manuscripts of the Ethiopic versionĀ and ninth-century Anglo-Saxon Bibles. However, some 12th centuryĀ Gospels have the now-known resurrection verses writtenĀ within asterisksāmarks used by scribes to indicate spuriousĀ passages in a literary document.
The Church claims that “theĀ resurrection is the fundamentalĀ argument for our Christian belief”Ā (Catholic Encyclopedia, FarleyĀ ed., vol. xii, p. 792), yet noĀ supernatural appearance of aĀ resurrected Jesus Christ isĀ recorded in any of the earliestĀ Gospels of Mark available. AĀ resurrection and ascension ofĀ Jesus Christ is the sine qua nonĀ (“without which, nothing”) ofĀ Christianity (CatholicĀ Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. xii,Ā p. 792), confirmed by wordsĀ attributed to Paul: “If Christ hasĀ not been raised, your faith is inĀ vain” (1 Cor. 5:17). TheĀ resurrection verses in today’sĀ Gospels of Mark are universallyĀ acknowledged as forgeries andĀ the Church agrees, saying “theĀ conclusion of Mark is admittedlyĀ not genuine … almost the entireĀ section is a later compilation”Ā (Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol. ii, p.Ā 1880, vol. iii, pp. 1767, 1781;Ā also, Catholic Encyclopedia, vol.Ā iii, under the heading “TheĀ Evidence of its Spuriousness”;Ā Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, pp. 274-9 underĀ heading “Canons”). Undaunted, however, the Church acceptedĀ the forgery into its dogma and made it the basis of Christianity.
There were significant omissions in the book of Luke:
Modern-day versions of the Gospel of Luke have a staggeringĀ 10,000 more words than the same Gospel in the Sinai Bible. SixĀ of those words say of Jesus “and was carried up into heaven”, butĀ this narrative does not appear in any of the oldest Gospels of LukeĀ available today (“Three Early Doctrinal Modifications of the TextĀ of the Gospels”, F. C. Conybeare, The Hibbert Journal, London, Ā vol. 1, no. 1, Oct 1902, pp. 96-113). Ancient versions do notĀ verify modern-day accounts of an ascension of Jesus Christ, andĀ this falsification clearly indicates an intention to deceive.
Today, the Gospel of Luke is the longest of the canonicalĀ Gospels because it now includes “The Great Insertion”, anĀ extraordinary 15th-century addition totalling around 8,500 wordsĀ (Luke 9:51ā18:14). The insertion of these forgeries into thatĀ Gospel bewilders modern Christian analysts, and of them theĀ Church said: “The character of these passages makes it dangerousĀ to draw inferences” (Catholic Encyclopedia , Pecci ed., vol. ii, p.Ā 407).
Just as remarkable, the oldest Gospels of Luke omit all versesĀ from 6:45 to 8:26, known inĀ priesthood circles as “The GreatĀ Omission”, a total of 1,547 words.Ā In today’s versions, that hole hasĀ been “plugged up” with passagesĀ plagiarised from other Gospels.Ā Dr Tischendorf found that threeĀ paragraphs in newer versions of
the Gospel of Luke’s version of theĀ Last Supper appeared in the 15thĀ century, but the Church still passesĀ its Gospels off as theĀ unadulterated “word of God”Ā (“Are Our Gospels Genuine orĀ Not?”, op. cit.)
Ā The Roman Catholic Church covered up this mess as best it could, but also admits it doesn’t know who wrote the books:
There is something else involved in this scenario and it isĀ recorded in the Catholic Encyclopedia. An appreciation of theĀ clerical mindset arises when the Church itself admits that it doesĀ not know who wrote its Gospels and Epistles, confessing that allĀ 27 New Testament writings began life anonymously:
“It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are notĀ traceable to the evangelists themselves … they [the NewĀ Testament collection] are supplied with titles which, howeverĀ ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of thoseĀ writings.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, pp. 655-6)
The Church maintains that “the titles of our Gospels were notĀ intended to indicate authorship”, adding that “the headings … wereĀ affixed to them” (Catholic Ā Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. i, p. 117,Ā vol. vi, pp. 655, 656). Therefore they are not Gospels writtenĀ “according to Matthew, Mark, Luke or John”, as publicly stated.Ā The full force of this confession reveals that there are no genuineĀ apostolic Gospels, and that the Church’s shadowy writings todayĀ embody the very ground and pillar of Christian foundations andĀ faith. The consequences are fatal to the pretence of Divine originĀ of the entire New Testament and expose Christian texts as havingĀ no special authority. For centuries, fabricated Gospels boreĀ Church certification of authenticity now confessed to be false, andĀ this provides evidence that Christian writings are whollyĀ fallacious.
Jesus or Mithra:
Mithra, one of a trinity, stood on a rock, the emblem of theĀ foundation of his religion, and was anointed with honey. After aĀ last supper with Helios and 11 other companions, Mithra wasĀ crucified on a cross, bound in linen, placed in a rock tomb andĀ rose on the third day or around 25 March (the full moon at theĀ spring equinox, a time now called Easter after the BabylonianĀ goddess Ishtar). The fiery destruction of the universe was a majorĀ doctrine of Mithraismāa time in which Mithra promised to returnĀ in person to Earth and save deserving souls. Devotees of MithraĀ partook in a sacred communion banquet ofĀ bread and wine, a ceremony that paralleledĀ the Christian Eucharist and preceded it byĀ more than four centuries.
Christianity is an adaptation ofĀ Mithraism welded with the DruidicĀ principles of the Culdees, some EgyptianĀ elements (the pre-Christian Book ofĀ Revelation was originally called TheĀ Mysteries of Osiris and Isis ), GreekĀ philosophy and various aspects ofĀ Hinduism.
Ā Is that really true?
Heck if I know: I’m not an historian.
But then, neither are any of the Armstrongists and that includes the erstwhile Dr. Hoeh.
Who knows?
But one thing is certain: Instead of spouting off about mythical church eras, those boys in the Cult of Armstrong had very well be getting down to work to prove the authenticity of the New Testament, rather than the authenticity of church eras. Church eras are completely unsupportable, of course, even if the New Testament is true. Nevertheless, you guys have a much bigger problem to resolve when your attendees and potential prospects start asking you about the validity of the New Testament.
Since you have all indicated that you have no need for my services, you guys are on your own: I’m not going to help you.
