“Those who question the fairness of looking into a man’s actions after he is dead should also question the fairness of using a man’s work after he is dead.”
Did Herbert Armstrong (pictured below) deliberately hide his sources of information so he could claim that God revealed doctrines to him directly, and that he did not get his teachings from men? Did he base his claim to be an apostle on assertions that he did not get his teachings from men? How many, if any, teachings did he actually get from the writings of other men?
The Worldwide church of God attempted to annihilate peoples personality, individuality, will, and character. The stranded souls that hitched their wagon to this organization unknowingly supported a power-hungry pharisaic and fastuous authoritative cult leader and his son, Garner Ted Armstrong. For all the alarums and excursions, the fact remains that without knowing it, we nurtured these two ungrateful incubi's. For that I can only ask for forgiveness.
After my WCG experience, I went to college to educate myself so I would have a greater understanding of the world about me and to understand why I ever fell for HWA's scam religion. This lead me to the conclusion that the appropriate action to take, in my judgment, is to provide people with opportunities to learn, develop, and exercise their potential as human beings, by freeing them from men who exploit and abuse them. This website and others are my vehicle to do just that.
Thanks to John Kiesz, we know how HWA thought God ‘revealed’ things to him. He would read or hear something, do a cursory check to see if it could be ‘proved’ by his logic, and it was ‘his’. I believe this particular CG7 booklet wasn’t copyrighted, not that it made much difference.
There was a sermonette about NASA scientists ‘missing a day’ in some computer analysis. On the scene was a Christian fellow who explained that taking ‘Joshua’s long day’, the backward movement of the sun for Anaz, etc, you got 24 hours. While the sermonette presented this as another ‘proof of the bible’, the story was pure fiction and we can thank some uncredited author – just like Washington Irving’s biography of Columbus led many to think 15th century scholars thought the world was flat.
Proof as an advertising vehicle designed to close a sale is vastly different from a typical mathematical proof, or the following of an evidentiary trail along the lines of the scientific method.
The funny thing is, the spectre of the weekly days being reset each new moon for a lunar calculation of the sabbath has been raised in the intervening years since HWA’s death, and there has been much deeper thought given to creation week as outlined in the Bible. The time keepers which reckon 24 hour periods were not even created until mid-creation cycle per the Genesis account. Even Nahmanides seemed to take in account the concept of relativity, though he lived 7-800 years prior to Einstein.
“Did Herbert Armstrong deliberately hide his sources of information so he could claim that God revealed doctrines to him directly, and that he did not get his teachings from men?”
HWA=Simon Magus.
Of course. But not only that, HWA also discredited his sources, those very same sources that gave him the Divine Knowledge from Gauwd! Didn’t HWA claim that B.I. wasn’t plagiarism because he proved J.H. Allen’s theory to himself and that’s why it wasn’t plagiarism. This just goes to show you what Gauwd HWA served.
Himself.
BTW, I got into B.I. through GTA. At least GTA listed J.H. Allen and others, even including secular works like Stuartt Pigot’s “Druids” in his biblioagraphy.
Thanks to John Kiesz, we know how HWA thought God ‘revealed’ things to him. He would read or hear something, do a cursory check to see if it could be ‘proved’ by his logic, and it was ‘his’. I believe this particular CG7 booklet wasn’t copyrighted, not that it made much difference.
There was a sermonette about NASA scientists ‘missing a day’ in some computer analysis. On the scene was a Christian fellow who explained that taking ‘Joshua’s long day’, the backward movement of the sun for Anaz, etc, you got 24 hours. While the sermonette presented this as another ‘proof of the bible’, the story was pure fiction and we can thank some uncredited author – just like Washington Irving’s biography of Columbus led many to think 15th century scholars thought the world was flat.
Proof as an advertising vehicle designed to close a sale is vastly different from a typical mathematical proof, or the following of an evidentiary trail along the lines of the scientific method.
The funny thing is, the spectre of the weekly days being reset each new moon for a lunar calculation of the sabbath has been raised in the intervening years since HWA’s death, and there has been much deeper thought given to creation week as outlined in the Bible. The time keepers which reckon 24 hour periods were not even created until mid-creation cycle per the Genesis account. Even Nahmanides seemed to take in account the concept of relativity, though he lived 7-800 years prior to Einstein.
BB
“Did Herbert Armstrong deliberately hide his sources of information so he could claim that God revealed doctrines to him directly, and that he did not get his teachings from men?”
HWA=Simon Magus.
Of course. But not only that, HWA also discredited his sources, those very same sources that gave him the Divine Knowledge from Gauwd! Didn’t HWA claim that B.I. wasn’t plagiarism because he proved J.H. Allen’s theory to himself and that’s why it wasn’t plagiarism. This just goes to show you what Gauwd HWA served.
Himself.
BTW, I got into B.I. through GTA. At least GTA listed J.H. Allen and others, even including secular works like Stuartt Pigot’s “Druids” in his biblioagraphy.
“That Long Day of Joshua’s”
wherefore?
Yes, HWA did write that he had seen Allen’s book, and claimed it had errors. Of course, he didn’t mention when he saw it, or what the errors were.
Recycled garbage.
Like the original was all that viable.