Category: Hoss Cartwright

Posted on

A Cut Above the Rest

GTA remarked about having a baby boy circumcised on the 8th day when that day would be on a Sabbath. He joked about only getting a baby circumcised “for health reasons” and the 8th day was no different than any other day. He added “sacrifice a dove while you’re at it.” (Actually, a dove is part of the offering that follows the mother’s purification period.) So here is another case where the COG strict obedience to scripture should be flagged with “conditions apply.”

HWA stated in “Missing Dimension in Sex” the circumcision command was “forever”, however, it was originally “physical” but now it’s “spiritual”. But he insisted if circumcision is done, it must be done as instructed, on the 8th day. According to the Talmud, it’s okay if the 8th day is a Sabbath, though health-related issues permit a different day.

The COGs go with the mainstream assumption that the decision of the Apostles in Acts 15 and the teaching of Paul did away with the command to circumcise boys on the 8th day. (Lev. 12:3, codifying Gen. 17­) The common argument is physical versus spiritual (and that is another story) and proof-texts such as Rom. 2:28-29 (right answer, wrong question.)

The origin of this problem is with the conversion of Gentiles. Adult, uncircumcised, male Gentiles became Christians. There is no requirement for them to become circumcised. So why was an Apostolic ruling necessary? What does this have to do with the command to circumcise baby boys?

Nothing. It was about ritual conversion to Judaism.

In the Second Temple period, particularly after Greek occupation of Judah, Jews had to deal with “the Gentile Problem”. Some Gentiles had an interest in the Jewish religion, and this posed a problem. In the 1st Century BCE, the Jewish sage Shammai came up with a process of ritual conversion to Judaism, the “18 Measures”, or, colloquially, “circumcision”. Acts 2 mentions “proselytes” or “converts to Judaism” – Gentiles who went through ritual conversion, including circumcision, and became “born again Jews”.

The Gentiles that Paul dealt with were mostly interested in Judaism (they were at the Synagogues) but had not gone through ritual conversion. The “circumcision party” or “Judaisers” insisted that for a Gentile to convert to “Christianity” (here the word is an anachronism) they must also undergo ritual conversion to Judaism (also an anachronism), “circumcision”.

So, the Acts 15 ruling on “circumcision” was that a Gentile can become a “Christian” without ritual conversion to “Judaism”. The letter the Apostles wrote and comments about Moses are another story. Adult males don’t need to be circumcised is the issue here. It had nothing to do with the command to circumcise baby boys. If Rom. 2:28-29 is read in context, it can be seen to refer to circumcision as part of ritual conversion.

An RCG writer, COGWriter, and others recognize that circumcision of
adult male converts was not required. So how did we get the idea that the Apostles abolished the command for circumcision on the 8th day? Possibly from the Greeks, who considered the ritual as barbaric and disfigurement; during their occupation of Israel, to “fit in” some Jews would undergo surgery to “reverse” their circumcision.

And misinformation is always abounds. In Acts 21, there was some concern in Jerusalem when Paul was accused of teaching Jews living among Gentiles not to circumcise their sons, and to abandon the law and tradition. So, in an effort to show the accusations false, Paul was asked to take part in Nazarite vows, which he did – he was still a “Temple Jew”.

The COG position is a bet each way: they assume 8th day circumcision not required, but it’s good for health reasons. Then there is a lapse into “physical” versus “spiritual” (a Platonic argument) and “baptism now replaces circumcision” (which is not supported by scripture). By the way, when Paul wrote “circumcise your heart” he may have been recalling that phrase from Leviticus or Deuteronomy.

COGWriter again, “we in the COGs normally do circumcise our sons”. Good, as traditionally, it is the father’s responsibility to do it! This makes me think of the “circumcision party”, David’s bag of Philistine foreskins, and “Shaky the mohel” from an episode of Seinfeld.

Now why didn’t  HWA figure out this mistake? One reason could be that it wasn’t  “revealled” to him – Rupert and others may not have mentioned it. But there was a reason to go with the mainstream flow – it looks like the Apostles were allowed to change things, And one thing he changed was tithing – from Agriculture to any form of income.

As for GTA’s ridiculing circumcision: anyone out there know if he was snipped? (Sorry, my copy of the videotape was censored.)

Posted on

Stoned

Note: One of my pet peeves about the COGs is “selective obedience”. We are familiar with arguments that mandate keeping the Ten Commandments, Holy Days, Dietary Laws, Tithing, etc. But for the Laws the COGs don’t choose to demand, their arguments used to show they are no longer required are not unlike than those used by mainstream churches for not keeping any of them.

Prefacing lists of false prophecies of HWA and other WCG luminaries, one may find a quote from Deuteronomy about ignoring false prophets. Deuteronomy 13 gets a bit more serious simply calling him a false prophet, decreeing prophets who lead followers to other gods or away from the Torah are to be stoned.

We’ve heard the line “don’t think I’ve come to abolish the Law”. A few lines after that statement in Matthew comes a warning about setting aside “the least of these commands”. From my time in the WCG, I’ve always been lead to believe it means the Ten Commandments, and “the least” is explained away somehow as we understood the commandments were all equal. But to a Jew, “these commands” would be all the commands in the Torah, and for some, the Oral Law (“Traditions of the Elders”) as well. Jewish teaching says the “least command” in the Torah is not taking a mother bird with her young (Deut. 22:6)

Dr Hoeh, Prophet Thiel and Apostle Pack have all written articles in which they argue which commands of the Torah they think no longer need to be kept.

Dr Hoeh’s 1957 Good News article (appended to Dr Thiel’s piece) mainly categorizes laws in the Torah as “Civil” and “Spiritual”. According to Dr Hoeh, the “Civil” laws were “done away”, with the exception of the ones that were kept – tithing, Holy Days, unclean meats, etc. Categorizing laws as “Civil”, “Moral”, “Ritual”, “Health”, etc, goes back to Augustine; of course Dr Hoeh wouldn’t want to tell us that.

Dr Thiel’s tome gets into more details, including a critique on the list of 613 commandments. 613 Commandments? Yes, Jewish sages, reading the Torah and summarizing ways to obey it derived 613 Commandments – that’s the Ten Commandments and 603 others. (This is all part of the “written Law”; the Oral Law is another story.) Some of these commands, he reasoned, were still applicable, some were no longer applicable, and some didn’t make sense to him (such as reciting the Shema and Grace after meals.) Wearing tzitzis (tassels) is out (although it was commanded for “all generations”) but not wearing linen/wool together is in; being ceremonially unclean is out, but not eating unclean meat is in.

The RCG article, which didn’t have a by-line, looked like a cleaned-up (read plagiarized) version of Bob’s piece. My apologies to the writer if he is no longer under Mr Pack’s employ.

Dr Hoeh’s article said “Only God can change laws”. Dr Thiel explains (in a convoluted way) that God isn’t to be disobeyed but some of the laws are no longer applicable – so, it appears he’s saying some laws can set aside… On Bob’s to do list is to go through the 613 commands and make a judgment call on each, but for now, he says we can get by on his general guidelines.

Since God never put the changes in writing, I guess it was up to Herman, Bob and Dave to figure it which laws to obey and which laws we can ignore. Good thing for them stoning was put aside as part of the “Civil law”.

And one more thing…

Someone always brings up sacrifices. There are some laws that can’t be kept and don’t need to be argued away. There is no Temple, there is no Levitical priesthood, and so no sacrifices or offerings – and no tithing. To keep tithing, but not sacrifices, twisting part of the book of Hebrews is used transfer tithing from the Levites to Melchizedek (who is in Heaven, so the money goes to their church.)

But didn’t the Apostles remove the requirement for circumcision? They changed it from physical to spiritual? That’s another story. If the Apostles did what many think they did, then it was okay when Apostle Joe Tkatch Sr decreed that since HWA said the dietary laws were Health laws, then there is nothing spiritually wrong with eating unclean meat. (A cartoon in Ambassador Report took this to its logical extreme.)

And, if the Apostles did what many think they did, they would have been stoned too…

Posted on

Give us a sign! The sign of the T!


Paul wrote the Jews want a sign, the Greeks want wisdom. And the Vulcans want logic.

COGs are good at producing “new truth”, “proof-texting logic” and “signs”. H.W.A (Hoeh, Waterhouse and Associates) came up with so many “proofs” that HWA was whoever he was supposed to be. I think Gerald Flurry’s first “proof” of being HWA’s successor was that he was disfellowshipped 40 days before the date of HWA’s death. And Dave Pack has God’s fingerprints. These proofs are no more credible than the proof that Franz Josef Strauss was the Beast.

Now I haven’t been picking on Pack and others without reason. The Pharisees, Scribes, disciples of John the Baptist and others questioned Jesus, and they were right in doing so. When someone appeared as a teacher and purveyor of truth it was their duty to check him out. I contend the COG critics have every right to sound out those who claim to be Top Dog of the Top COG or facilitator of the faithful fragment. If you don’t like the heat, don’t put yourself in the spotlight!

And now, as I understand it, Bob Thiel stated he has a “sign” regarding the timing of the setup of his CCOG.

Back in 2006, in the LCG, Dr Thiel said he was asked to do a sermon on the Law during the FOT. And this year, 2013, as pastor of the CCOG, he decided to do a sermon on the Law at the FOT again.

The clincher comes when he noticed Deuteronomy 31:10-13:

Then Moses commanded them: “At the end of every seven years, in the year for canceling debts, during the Feast of Tabernacles, when all Israel comes to appear before the LORD your God at the place he will choose, you shall read this Torah before them in their hearing…
… as long as you live in the land you are crossing the Jordan to possess. [NIV]

Got it? A sermon on the Law, seven years, at the FOT. Wow, this must be a sign that God wanted Bob to leave the LCG and start his own COG.

Now Moses didn’t say, “Every seven years at the FOT, wherever you chose to hold it, give a sermon about your interpretation of the Law.” The seventh year is the year when debts are canceled, slaves are released… [Wait a minute, slaves… didn’t Bob call himself the Overseer?] And this is to be done at the place God will choose: first it was the Tabernacle at Shiloh, then the Temple in Jerusalem.

In Synagogues, the weekly “Torah portion” is read each week, with the objective of reading the Torah through each year. Of course when the “seven years” begins is not certain, and strictly speaking this applied to Temple service, or at least living in Israel. (Eretz Israel, the Land of Israel, not some country dubbed Israel by British-Israelism.)

[“Sign of the T” was borrowed from Brave New World (Aldous Huxley)]