Category: Hoss Cartwright

Posted on

Packing Authority, for crying out loud!

In weekly installments, Dave Pack continues to position RCG as Top COG, by showing the other COGs are worse off financially and administratively.

 

In Cry Aloud, Spare Not, Mr Pack lashes out against other COGs and congregations lacking whole-hearted commitment to “the work”. Starting with Isa. 58:1 (“spare not”) he then uses Matt 7:29 (“having authority”) out of context, quotes various colorful terms Jesus used when speaking of evildoers. Following along are quotes from HWA’s notorious 1967 member letter – the one in which HWA uses Loma on her deathbed to demand money. Back in the Clarion Call sermon, Mr Pack conveys his envy of HWA’s masterful writing skills.

 

The point apparently being made is that the self-evident 21st Century Apostle believes he must obey his commission to “speak with authority” which he interprets as name-calling leaders of other COGs and lethargic (insufficiently sacrificing) members.

 

My two shekels worth is about the misuse of Matt 7:28-29: When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law. (NIV) These verses a section of Matthew that begins with the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus had been expounding the Law, not denouncing critics.

 

As for authority, the crowds were amazed that Jesus stated his take on a number of issues without reference to scholarly interpretation. Other teachers of the Law would quote their teacher, who may quote another teacher; some may give 50 different interpretations of a single verse from the Torah. Jesus obviously didn’t do that and I suppose one who wished to speak “with authority” would not be repeatedly quoting his teacher (HWA).

 

Some of the teachings in this section of Matthew had diverse interpretations in the first century. Among Pharisees, there were two opposing camps, the House of Shammai, and the House of Hillel (grandfather of Paul’s teacher, Gamaliel).  Jesus’ teachings were usually closer to that of the more liberal Hillel than the stricter Shammai. A notable exception was divorce, as Hillel taught that a man could divorce his wife for simply serving a bad meal.

 

Mr Pack wants to use the “strong words” that Jesus leveled at corrupt rulers, hypocrites, those with teachings or traditions that contradict scripture, and so on. I’d say that Ambassador Report covered a good share of these at the WCG. Let’s see, corruption – siphoning off tithe money (the tithing doctrine itself twisted scripture to enforce a teaching that was very specific), hypocrisy – teaching against doctors while HWA had the finest medical care, contradicting scripture – sacrifice to give to the Church rather than help sick or elderly non-member parents (“honor your father and your mother”) – telling members to borrow money from the bank under false pretenses to give to the Church (lying, fraud) – and many more.

 

But Mr Pack is right about one thing; he did forever change my view of Isaiah 58:1.
………………

Hoss

For more on Mr Pack, see AR 32 under the heading “David Pack’s Reign of Terror”

 

Posted on

Pentecost 1974

 

Of Course He Was!

Pentecost 1974 – Many weeks ago…

The other day while scanning the COG sites, I noticed Dr Thiel informing us that Pentecost will be on May 19 this year.

 

On a Sabbath in 1974, a combined service was held so all in our area could hear a tape from Pasadena. We were assembled together for a double dose of doctrinal correction New Truth. As I recall, GTA came up first and explained the new rules on D&R – divorce and remarriage; next, HWA told us Pentecost is on Sunday, rather than Monday. Of course, HWA tried to vindicate his long-held Aristotlian exegesis interpreting the command for counting the Omer to Shavuot by explaining the Hebrew words with English grammar. Perhaps a tale is in order.

 

Herb was driving through a city looking for Pentecost Lane. He read that it was off Fiftieth Avenue. Starting at what he thought was First Avenue, he reasoned Fiftieth Avenue must be 50 streets from First Avenue. So he drove along and started counting streets. Eventually he got to Fifty-first Avenue, and reckoned an unmarked alley was Pentecost Lane.

 

Although there were some indications that Herb was in the wrong place, he was sure he was at his intended destination. It is obvious that Herb was driving alone, because if Loma had been with him, she would have nagged, Herb, get out and ask someone for directions!

 

From what I remember, HWA said he consulted with someone who taught Hebrew, and, what do you know, he had been wrong was revealed new truth! In Hebrew, he learned, the word translated to from is inclusive, as in the first day from today is today, not tomorrow. So in a sense, counting 50 days from (in Hebrew) was counting 49 days from (in his logic).

 

Of course, there is the other matter of which day to count from. In the command “the morrow after the Sabbath” (Lev. 23) the Sabbath could been taken to mean the weekly Sabbath, or the First Day of Unleavened Bread; “the morrow” is the Day of Firstfruits, when the Wave-sheaf offering is made.

Apparently the Sadducees had taken the Sabbath to mean the weekly Sabbath, and modern rabbinic Judaism takes it to mean the First Day of Unleavened Bread.

 

I don’t know if HWA just assumed that Sabbath meant the weekly Sabbath, or he got that from another source. There is some additional symbolism added when taking the weekly Sabbath, as that puts the Day of Firstfruits on the Sunday after Passover. This day would then be the day of Jesus’ resurrection (assuming Saturday night) or  “Easter Sunday”.

Hoss

Posted on

Saul AKA Paul

A few weeks ago I was skimming through another “must read” tome by Mr Pack and noticed a reference to the Apostle Paul, with a parenthetical “then still Saul”. This is an example of the assumption that the “conversion” of Saul was accompanied by a name change.

 

The traditional Protestant line has been, Saul was converted from Jew to Christian and had his name changed from Saul to Paul. Unlike Abram, Sarai, Jacob and others, there is no scriptural reference to a name change, formal or otherwise; that idea is another “missing verse” dilemma. The Damascus road account is in Acts 9; in Cyprus, Acts 13 mentions that Saul is “also called Paul”. Rather than a name change, we’re informed of an AKA, like Simon, with “called Peter” added twice in Matthew.

 

In Saul’s case, it had to do with Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Take for example the different meanings given words in dialects of English. I recall an Australian minister who said he use to razz one-time GTA aid Randy Dick.  While Mr Dick’s surname may cause some awkward moments with various dialects of English, Randy, in the UK and Australia, add to it.

 

In first century colloquial Greek, Saul apparently sounded like a word meaning conceited or arrogant, and prostitute. Paul, on the other hand, was a common Greek name that sounded like Saul. Following the Saul/Paul clarification in Acts, there are two instances where the Damascus road story is recounted. In both cases, Saul spoke in Aramaic, and used the name Saul in the account.

 

If Saul had written his letters with his name transliterated into the Greek “saul”, could you imagine possible reactions? How would the Romans welcome a visit from Apostle Full-of-himself, or the Corinthians, being reprimanded for promiscuity, and told about love, by Apostle Want-a-good-time?

 

As far as conversion goes, Saul did acknowledge that Jesus (Yeshua in Hebrew) was the Messiah. But as the record shows, he was still a law keeping, Temple-going Jew, despite what Galatians appears to say.

By the way, the “must read” mentioned above promised an “unknown Bible prophecy” that apparently shows RCG is the true splinter. Can’t wait – could this possibly be a prophecy Dr Thiel hasn’t found?

Hoss.