Narcissists Ruin Everything

After Rod Meredith's death, LCG made a big-to-do of publishing his master's thesis from Ambassador College in 1956. The title of this 138 page booklet is "The Plain Truth About The Protestant Reformation." On the back cover, it says, "Before his death in 2017, he began editing and lightly revising his thesis for a brand-new audience."

After reading it, I had to wonder why there was not a single person in the boardroom who said, "Given our own church history, would it be wise to publish this?"

Maybe one or more did. And maybe that is why they state it is for a "brand-new audience." But I couldn't help but think how this book will not bode well for the old audience and those in-the-know on the history of Herbert W. Armstrong and his Worldwide Church of God cult.

Certainly, we are aware of the arrogance that exudes from the AC elite running all the splinters. Quite possibly, Gerald Weston settled the matter by saying something like, "It is true that the booklet reads as if it was our own putrid history but it is not likely our sheep have the mental capacity to make such a connection. After all, we are selling this to the generation born in this church after 1986. Surely, our youth won't scan the internet to learn the truth about the Church their parents birthed them into. And any of their parents who do happen to be able to make the connection have been embroiled in the lie for so long that the cognitive dissonance will not allow them to challenge it." (You read that with Weston's voice in your head, didn't you?)

What I want to do is just review the booklet and point out, in particular, the ways the Protestant Reformation mirrors the history of HWA and the WCG. By doing so, I will prove that Roderick C. Meredith was indeed, a prophet. His thesis is, in fact, a not-so-encrypted prophecy of who HWA would prove to be and what his cult would become over the next 30 years. (Save the stupid comments. I'm being facetious about the prophet thing.)

As is true of just about every argument made in the churches of God, RCM plants his whole thesis on a straw man. He asks the same question, chapter after chapter, "Was the Reformation a return to the faith once for all delivered?" He then sets his own prophetic trap by saying in the close of chapter one pertaining to his central question above: 

"This is the question that should burn itself into the minds and hearts of all thinking men and women, because the final answer to this question will determine -to a great extent- the real meaning of  the religious division and confusion of our time."

He also states at the beginning of his thesis that, "We must weigh any religious denomination or movement in the balance of Christ's prophetic saying: 'You will know them by their fruits.'"

Before moving on from his opening chapter, I do want to share this rather bizarre quote from page 20:

"We need to bear in mind that these men [pre-reformation reformers] -and Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and their associates-had all been reared from childhood in Roman Catholic doctrine and practice. They had been taught nothing else, and since there were practically no religious books or Bibles available in the common tongues , they knew of little else than the Roman Catholic faith, ceremonies, rituals and traditions. Therefore, it was virtually impossible for them to objectively look at the religious system in which they had been reared and compare it to the beliefs and practices of Jesus Christ and the inspired New Testament Church."

Wow! So, let me get this straight. They could not approach the Bible objectively because they were Catholics but apparently, former Methodist, Gilbert Cranmer was able to found the Sabbath-keeping Church of God. And of course, Herb, of Quaker stock, and self-evident narcissist and incestuous child rapist, had the "objectivity" to get baptized by a Baptist preacher, collect minister checks from COG7D for 5-7 years, then start his own (information marketing business) religious cult, cherry-picking ideas from others who thought them, built by already impoverished dupes who kept sending him money even as his false prophecies piled up on radio. Makes sense.

In the 2nd chapter, his first concern about the Catholic church was the Pope's "insatiable craving for money." (You can't make this stuff up.)

The Roman pontiffs were able to extract this money from their unwary subjects by various means concealed under the appearance of religion." -p.24

He goes on to say that much of early reform and revolt was from German nobility who wished to free themselves from "papal taxation." Later, he calls it a "ruthless financial policy." But what RCM was very careful not to call it was "tithes" which is exactly what it was. The Apostolic church certainly never collected tithes as it was understood that it was done away with the Old Covenant. It wasn't until the 500's that the Catholic Church attempted to collect tithes in order to pay for their ornate cathedral buildings but was rejected. The Catholic Church finally succeeded duping Europe into tithing in 777. The sick irony is, of course, that WCG went on to demand 30%+ in tithes and offerings. As far as I know, that record of financial extraction hasn't been surpassed until Dave Pack declared 100%.

In chapter 3-5 (and a few other places in the booklet) is a personal attack on Martin Luther. Here is a list of character traits he brings out:

1. a desire to escape authority and obedience
2. periods of exaltation and depression
3. moodiness
4. dogged by perpetual guilt
5. deep sense of personal inadequacy
6. spiritually drunk
7. practiced eisegesis
8. rejected or ignored Scriptures he disagreed with
9. justified using violence
10. became enmeshed in politics
11. condoned bigamy
12. chose division instead of fellowship over petty differences
13. stubborn and self-willed
14. lived life as though above the law or what he taught others
15. inconsistent and self-contradictory
16. proclivity to pick-n-choose from multiple sources to formulate a private system of belief

Obviously, anyone with first-hand experience with or read about HWA knows RCM is describing his very own "spiritual papa." Martin Luther and Herbert Armstrong suffered from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. One noteworthy reference on the subject is a book by Sam Vaknin called, "Malignant Self Love" with a chapter addressing religious leaders. Another is a video on Youtube by Dan Rogers covering the Adventist roots of Grace Communion International. You can watch it below.

Chapter 6 is spent attacking John Calvin for essentially the same character traits as Luther. He does spend more time on his theology but also emphasizes his violent character in enforcing very strict rules of life and carrying out acts of torture and murder on sinners. Sharing more narcissistic traits with Luther and Herb, Calvin was never wrong, refused to change anything he committed to and justified the death of fellow Christians over extreme petty doctrinal differences. HWA (as far as I know)  never advocated for the death of anyone openly but one has to realize, placing a narcissist in the right setting where he knows he can get away with it, will indeed stoop to any heinous sin, whether it be fraud, sexual immorality, theft, torture or murder. In addressing the sheer harshness of Luther and Calvin, RCM concludes by saying:

"This very dominance of Luther and Calvin was, in many ways, detrimental. It led men to accept without question their doctrine and practice-never thinking to prove these ideas by the holy word of God...Protestants often have tended to make infallible popes out of Luther, Calvin and the other early reformers."

Is it just me or does Herb deserve a seat at the same table? For Herb's-sake, the man has been dead for 34 years and if you question even the pettiest of doctrines in the churches of God openly, you are red-flagged by both minister and some members as a rebel, heretic, dangerous, etc.

And on p.107, he says:

"Before gaining political power, the reformers all insisted upon the inalienable right of every Christian to search the Bible for himself and to judge its teachings independently. But once they were in power, woe be to the Catholic, the Anabaptist, or to any other who continued to insist upon this inalienable right!"

The COG7D was established with Congregational governance. By the time HWA came into contact with that church, Andrew Dugger was throwing his weight around, attempting to centralize more power over the church to himself. Narcissists, when not in charge, are all for rebellion, revolution, anarchy or whatever it takes to dismantle power and control. One of Herb's better articles was on church government in 1939. It is clear that he was absolutely opposed to top down hierarchical government and made a decent case for it being unbiblical. But as some know, by 1979, HWA had just finished using RCM and RFM as his toady henchmen to rid HWA of his "liberal" enemies and secure his papal status in his Armstrongian Catholic church.

RCM is very careful not to attack Roman Catholic government throughout the book, but instead, zeros in on the problematic effects of that government. In his mind, the government wasn't the problem, it was the people. The Catholics are devoid of God and His Holy Spirit, therefore they could not do good. But WCG was Spirit-filled and Spirit-led by "holy" men and therefore "holy" men can make any government function properly.

RCM candidly admits in his Global Church of God government booklet that it was he and Herman Hoeh who convinced HWA in 1953-54 that top-down, hierarchical, one-man rule is the New Testament government. In many ways, RCM played right into the narcissist monster in hiding, feeding him all the narcissistic supply he needed to continue moving forward, his money-making cult venture.

[An interesting side note: he dedicates a page to the lust of nationalism that was sweeping the continent of Europe along side the Reformation. What he obviously didn't catch was the fact that what started out as a theological theory in England at the time, because of the Reformation, evolved into British-Israelism.]

"It is an undeniable fact the 'fruit' of the Protestant Reformation is the divided 'churchianity' of our day. We must say at the outset that this is bad fruit. Paul tells us that the Spirit of God produces unity-not division." -p.104

Just imagine how easy this was to say in 1956 and not have a clue that what he put in motion with Herman Hoeh in 1954 would lead to what we have today! Here is another easy thing to say in 1956 in the last chapter of the booklet, having no clue what the next 30 years would bring:

"We are forced to conclude that the Reformation certainly did not lead men to the Bible...nor return men to the faith which was once for all delivered...We must recognize that the leaders of the Reformation were only transferring authority to themselves within the same pagan system."

This is exactly what Rod Meredith and Herman Hoeh did in 1954. The two most important doctrines every false church must have in place, in direct opposition to what Christ required in Matthew 20:20-28, in order to draw all power, control and authority to itself is:

1. top down, hierarchical governance
2. tithing

I don't care if all your other doctrines, dogmas and traditions are spot on, you are disqualified on these two false doctrines alone. Period. Spirit-filled or not, men are not qualified to practice God's hierarchical government (He does indeed have in Heaven) because we are not God. The history of HWA and his cult business is ample proof that this is simply an undeniable truth. The history of man proves this undeniable truth.

The back cover claims there were light revisions made. If I had to guess, these two comments at the very end were probably part of that:

"The true church will be a body of people continually growing into more complete truth and knowledge and deeper understanding!...For decades, this church has dared, as no other church on earth, to proclaim definite, specific prophetic events to occur-and they have been happening!" 

Seriously? The only thing remotely close to being prophetically accurate from the churches of God is this booklet I facetiously pointed out at the beginning. Growth? The churches of God are in suspended animation and have been for at least since Herb drew his last breath, but arguably longer. Some members and their children in the churches of God are actually growing in truth, knowledge and understanding. It is the AC elite that refuse. The churches of God are filled with good people who want to transition from a cult to a church but I wonder if the long shadow of a dead gnostic narcissist will forever prohibit such a jubilee.

I will just conclude with a quote from a Protestant reformer, John Knox, whom RCM quotes on pg. 3:

"All worshipping, honouring, or service of God invented by the brain of man in the religion of God without His own express commandment is idolatry...it shall nothing excuse you to say, we trust not in idols, for so will every idolater allege; but if either you or they in God's honour do anything contrary to God's word, you show yourself to put your trust in somewhat else besides God, and so are idolaters, Mark, brethren, that many maketh an idol of their own wisdom or phantasy; more trusting to that which they think good not unto God."

V

Weston Still Not Woke

woke: (informal adjective) alert to injustice in society, especially racism.

Why is Weston so "square" when it comes to marijuana? It is as if he has made it his personal mission; his chosen idol to demonize on behalf of humanity (HWA's was mainstream Christianity. RCM's was the homosexual. GEW has chosen the Devil's lettuce). LCG has produced a 33 page booklet on marijuana. There have been several articles on it. Marijuana was part of Weston's winter family weekend message 2 years in a row and additional must-play sermons.

In the latest issue of Tomorrow's World, Gerald has an article titled, "Cannabis: Miracle Cure or Snake Oil?" The faulty logic of "dichotomous reasoning" is on display once again; a mainstay of church of God apologetics. Marijuana MUST be a miracle plant from God or absolute snake oil, brethren. There is no in-between!

LCG has chosen to take political sides on multiple issues over the years (always leaning right) so it should be no surprise that LCG has taken a political position on the war on drugs. In the article, Weston complains about the huge cannabis lobby spreading lies. He asks, "How many know that George Soros has pumped $100,000,000 into the sales pitch?" [I see what you did there with all those zeros for effect.]

Weston actually starts the article with 2 very good questions: 

1. Why is cannabis controversial?
2.  Why do people who have no interest in using it, "suddenly" support it?

He starts his argument with a bizarre premise that the cannabis lobby is winning a propaganda war by confusing or ignoring the difference between THC and CBD. I don't know where he has been but this has been widely known and understood for decades. THC was first extracted in 1942 and first isolated from cannabis in 1964. Every child in the "just say no" era to the present learns the difference between THC and CBD in junior high health class and then hears it again once they enter the work place annually in order for the company to maintain corporate insurance breaks. This, of course, may escape most in the ministry because they never went to public schools and never held a real job in their whole lives.

The Ohio Medical Marijuana Control Program lists 21 conditions medical marijuana can be prescribed for but Weston argues that one lone "distinguished member" of the Ohio Medical Marijuana Advisory Committee, Dr. Gary Wenk, is the only voice of morality and reason, who claims any doctor who prescribes marijuana is "ignorant" and "there is no reliable clinical evidence to support the use of marijuana for any of these conditions--none at all." Wenk claims evidence supporting it's medical use is anecdotal and not based on "objective and carefully performed scientific studies." [Amazing how blatant  Armstrongists are in  cherry-picking science when it serves their agenda and ignore it completely when it does not.] Weston makes another leaping dichotomous assumption by saying, "His (Dr. Gary Wenk) approach stands in stark contrast to so many uninformed enthusiasts, who jump to the defense of marijuana without asking some fundamental questions." So anyone that disagrees with Wenk is a complete and utter fool.

Since Weston's non-political, unbiased, objective, moral high ground, science-backed position is so obviously "right" then what are the answers to his two questions above? How can this even be a controversy at all?

"Follow the Money." That is the subhead and reason in Weston's perception of reality. "A funny thing happened after medical marijuana gained acceptance. Entrepreneurs discovered that there is money in it!"

Wow! That is really amazing. After decades of the seedy underworld in kahoots with the U.S. military and other governmental agencies have made billions of dollars having always controlled the flow and money exchange for drugs, Weston thinks people have suddenly awakened to the financial opportunities in marijuana. This awakening to the sudden prospect that money could be made, caused a wave of pseudo-research to be done in order to claim marijuana was medicinal? So, it couldn't possibly have been that sincere research that showed medicinal properties in marijuana starting all the way back in the 1890's is what then triggered entrepreneurs to desire investing in it? This conclusion can only be made by someone who is either willfully or out of sheer ignorance, not WOKE.

This should not be a surprise as Armstrongism has always been steeped in a peculiar brand of well and not-so-well hidden racism. I think it is both willfully and out of ignorance. Weston actually alludes to it very briefly toward the beginning when he says, "Activists have mounted different public opinion campaigns at different times, such as making the claim that the war against cannabis, and against illegal drugs in general, is racially biased." He quickly lumps this in with other ideas, he deems lies, that the war on drugs is a waste of resources, that it ruins ordinary people's lives and it withholds the medicinal properties of the plant from being utilized. All, of which, is actually true! That is the real answer to Weston's questions of why is it controversial and why people who have no interest in using the stuff (such as myself) support legalization. He literally buries the actual truth in the middle of one paragraph early on and then quickly dismisses it as propaganda, ignorance, hedonism and driven by greed for money.

He would like you to think that the so called "activists" as he calls them, are all just hedonistic potheads or amoral entrepreneurs. But the true activists are indeed medical professionals, scientists, psychologists, sociologists, judges, lawyers, police officers, social workers, city mayors and state governors and other boots-on-the-ground, good people who live the war on drugs day in and day out. Can Weston be woke? Let's try.

... ... ...

After food, water and sex, humans spend all of their resources seeking altered states of consciousness. These states of ecstasis can be divided into 3 categories:

1. Flow states, or "being in the zone"
2. Contemplative and mystical states
3. Psychedelic states

These states occur when we establish S.T.E.R. This is a sense of Selflessness, Timelessness, Effortlessness and Richness. It is opportune moments to leave the cares of the daily grind of our minds. These states have led to the production of all great art, music, literature, inventions, science, technology and general complex problem solving throughout the existence of mankind. The human quest to harness the benefits  of ecstasis  and minimize the risk is as old as civilization itself. Religions, including Christianity and Armstrongism is steeped in this quest whether Weston is willing to admit it or not. This includes everything from observing the Sabbath, song services, prayer, meditation, 72 minute lectures and fasting, to the use of alcohol, coffee, high fructose corn syrup, prescription drugs, naturopathy, chiropractic, unlicensed massage parlors in Tyler Texas and cold showers followed by vigorous toweling after an evening with one's daughter.

The often more extreme and dangerous methods involve the use of substances that operate in the realm of producing psychedelic states. What Weston fails to understand or acknowledge is that no one has really argued that marijuana and other illegal drugs are safe. But that is the straw man argument Weston chooses to make. LCG's booklet, "Marijuana: What They Aren't Telling You" is 33 pages of government sanctioned research, often exaggerated but generally true about the dangers, that "they" have been repeating for decades in elementary school health class. The booklet brought absolutely nothing to the discussion that hasn't been said since (for me) the 80's. And it completely ignored the arguments made as to why it is even controversial today. Makes for a completely worthless booklet that has actually done nothing but kill LCG's credibility on the subject. So openly biased and out-dated, the young people in the church they are hoping to persuade are laughing at their sheer ignorance. By making such a monumental piss-poor argument, intelligent young people who know how to function seamlessly in this Information Age are doing what I have done; actually getting informed on all of the arguments that have legitimately made marijuana controversial.

Weston is partly right. It is about following the money but not in the way he thinks. The story is also about governmental power and racism.When governments seek to exercise increasing power over their citizens, they inevitably seek to control that which drives us in our daily lives. So it should be no surprise that our own government, in its slide toward a police state, turned its attention to drugs. But it was not in the way you would think or for reasons you would hope were altruistic.

In the roaring 20's, Americans were having a great time. It was a period of unprecedented wealth in America to that point. Hey, drugs and alcohol flowed freely, even in the decade of failed prohibition. Nothing to complain about until the music stopped, giving way to the Great Depression. The Great Gatsby era was over and millions of people began to suffer. When people suffer, they need a scapegoat and a growing Darwinian eugenics-oriented white aristocracy was all too willing to give them one. One such priestess to provide demons was Margaret Sanger. I think most people know by now that Planned Parenthood was started to "destroy the Negro and all undesirables from America" as she put it. These undesirables also included Mexicans and other non-whites and poor whites not fit to live because of handicaps or abnormalities. Another, not-so-known, high priest of progressive thought was Harry Jacob Anslinger.

Harry Jacob Anslinger was the first Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, serving from 1930 to 1962. After WWI, he served as a prohibition agent in the Bahamas. As the prohibition years of 1920-1933 were winding to a close as an abject failure, Harry was given the first commission of a new bureau thanks to his wife being related to the uber rich Mellons. Andrew Mellon was Treasury Secretary and the prohibition department was under the Treasury.

When Harry was born in 1892, every kid in that generation (Herb's peeps) grew up in a time when drugs were legal and easily accessible around the whole world. Heroin and cocaine were available in every American pharmacy. They were in popular cough mixtures and even Coca Cola. Heroin and cocaine were outlawed in 1914 but with alcohol nearing legal status, Anslinger knew there was not enough narcotic usage in the country to justify much of a budget for his new department and before long, he could be out of his post. Then he began noticing racist headlines across the country where Mexicans were losing their minds and going on killing sprees after using marijuana. Stories of black men that were fraternizing with white women after using marijuana and going on violent raping sprees. Harry was no stranger to marijuana and was already convinced long ago that the plant was neither addictive, nor induced violence. But he changed his mind overnight when he realized it could provide money to his department, more governmental control and power and to use that power on people he already despised, along with much of white America, so it seemed. Newspapers all over the country were producing the scapegoat and so Harry ran with this opportune moment.

And that is how it was indeed about money, governmental power and racism. He preyed upon the fears of racist whites across America who believed Mexican immigrants and African Americans were the most dangerous people in the nation. To sure up his argument, he rounded up 30 scientific experts but to his dismay, they all (but one) told him what he already knew; marijuana did not cause violence and insanity, the racist stories in the press were lies and it would be wrong to ban it. Harry, of course, ignored the 29 and used his one expert to start a nationwide campaign to demonize marijuana and the blacks, Mexicans and immigrating Asians on the west coast. When he was pressed to fund independent studies by medical professionals around the country, he obstinately declared he would not, nor would he ever. In fact, he spent his decades in office spending much of his time threatening and silencing scientists, medical researchers, doctors and care-givers with his growing department resources. 

His hatred of blacks carried over specifically toward black jazz musicians. Convinced it was devil music, he harassed them mercilessly, hoping to put them all behind bars. Many believe his harassment led to the death of Billie Holiday, as he was absolutely fixated by her and hell-bent on destroying her. He made wild accusations to the press that drug addiction was near 100% among "the Negro people." He was not shy about using the N-word and if a black agent ever complained, he was fired. He promoted wild stories coming from police departments around the country. One in particular was an incident in North Carolina where an officer supposedly shot an out-of-control Negro, high on cocaine, directly in the heart and he didn't even flinch. Stories of black superhuman beasts on drugs led directly to police all across the South to increase the calibers of their guns.

He also promoted stories about Chinese immigrants who were coming over to steal white jobs and white women. Stories claimed they would lure white women into their "opium dens" and enslave them for "unspeakable sexual depravity." The endgame was to strike the white race down and gain command of the world. This led to mass raids on Chinese homes and businesses. They were driven off lands, shot, hanged and even burned alive up and down the west coast.

Harry eventually conscripted the whole world into the war on drugs. As he destroyed the lives of scientists and doctors in the United States who opposed him, he also went after Mexico's chief of Alcohol and Narcotics, Dr. Viniegra. His 14 year study showed the truth about marijuana, the failure of prohibition and the need for legal status of drugs and state control because they are dangerous. Dr. Viniegra knew this would reduce the power in the criminal underworld and corrupt government officials, and free up resources for education and rehabilitation. Harry demanded Mexico fire him. Mexico complied and the cartels blossomed in just a few short years. When Mexico then began providing rehab as a result of rising addictions, Anslinger cut off all opiates needed for pain relief to all Mexican hospitals. Mexico had a choice: writhe in agony or join the war. This policy was put on wash and repeat, bribing every nation in the world to join the war on drugs or lose American aid.

The war on drugs at its genesis was never rooted in science, compassion, or to protect children from addiction. The war on drugs was a war on minorities waged by white supremacists. And that included all the ones across the country hiding behind the badge, the printing press, business tycoon board rooms, political offices, church lecterns and everyday working people who wanted to believe that the answer to all social ills was to simply support a war on plants and those non-whites who use them.

The war on drugs is the truest example of institutional racism. Harry Anslinger is long gone and his story is not known by the average citizen today. But his legacy remains intact. Unsuspecting people around the country without a racist bone in their bodies enter the institution everyday with ideal hopes of helping and serving all people. So many are quickly disillusioned and they don't quite know why. But many of them are waking up. The reason marijuana is so controversial is because people are asking why we have such a broken criminal justice system and a supposed war on drugs with no end in sight.

Statistically, drug use is equal among all races, classes and walks of life. As I mentioned before, after water, food and sex, it is a resource that provides what all humans seek. 1993 statistics showed while only 19% of drug dealers were black, 64% of drug dealers arrested were black. 943 whites per 100,000 get jail time for drugs while 4,919 blacks per 100,000 get jail time. Drugs are being used just as often at parties in white neighborhoods but it is black, Mexican and poor white neighborhoods that get raided. The police admit they are easy targets and that raiding affluent white neighborhoods would not go over with the local Mayors, judges, politicians and wealthy donors; just as Dr. Viniegra said would happen.

Weston claims all reputable sources prove marijuana is a gateway drug and that drugs are addictive. These so called reputable sources are the same ones Anslinger put in motion decades ago. If you want funding for drug research in the United States, it must be in support of the war on drugs...period. But there are more and more reputable sources coming out of other countries and statistics from nations that have already ended their war on drugs. The facts are in. Marijuana is no longer considered a gateway drug. The only gateway marijuana provides is a prison cell for blacks. And addiction? It is now being realized globally that addiction is predominately caused by childhood trauma and not drugs themselves. Drugs provide relief from the torture chambers some poor souls endure in their minds. This does not make them criminals, subhuman, or animals worthy of imprisonment. The solution is to stop demonizing the addict as a sub-human criminal and start recognizing addiction as an adaptation to the cages we live in. Criminalization needs to be replaced with compassionate rehabilitation. All of the money wasted fighting a war on drugs would cover the costs of addiction rehab and still have vast resources left over.

Jim Brown said he originally started playing football [This is in no way an endorsement of Bob's Super Bowl doctrine] because he hated white people and it provided the only avenue for a black man to hurt white people and not only get away with it but get paid for it. I have a gay cousin who used to post articles about Catholic priests  and Christian pastors that would get exposed for molesting boys. I asked him if he did this to expose Christian hypocrites or homosexual child molesters? (He stopped posting them) My point here is that whenever someone desires to commit acts unacceptable to polite society, they will often gravitate to places that give them access to do what they desire. Sexual deviants and pedophiles become teachers, coaches and pastors. Jim Brown found a safe outlet to express his racism. And white supremacists join police forces all around the country because it gives them an outlet to terrorize black neighborhoods and be protected by the badge. The war on drugs provide these Klansmen in disguise, a legal and protected outlet to carry out their vicious fantasies. Several police officers have told me when you decide to transfer from one department to another, you do your research because one of the things you want to know is if the department is either run by or at least friendly to white supremacists. [Save all the comments running to the defense of police and pastors. It's stupid I have to ad this caveat but here it is: of course, most police officers and pastors are good people] This is to show how a system originally established under racist pretense still provides an outlet for racists today to get away with evil acts.

Police officers began noticing when they arrested rapists, incidents of rape went down. When they arrested racists, race related crimes went down. But when they arrested drug dealers, murder went through the roof. The reason is because the illegal drug trade is so lucrative, when you remove a dealer from his territory, a war breaks out for that territory. Police began realizing there would never be an end to the war on drugs unless something different was done. They recognize as well as a growing number of sensible Americans truly informed, that:

1. Drugs are dangerous and is exactly why they should be legalized, controlled, regulated and distributed under government controls.
2. Illegal drugs fuel the violent economy of a criminal underworld.
3. The prohibition of drugs in this country is rooted in racism and has left in place, a criminal justice system that is inherently racist and provides racists with an outlet to do evil.
4. Criminalizing drugs only serves to enrich criminals, while abusing the poor and traumatized in our society.

There is a growing number of police officers, judges, lawyers, prison officers and other criminal justice professionals joining a group  originally called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) but renamed Law Enforcement Action Partnership. Founded in 2002, they now have over 150,000 members and supporters. These are the "activists" Weston brushes aside in his article expecting you to assume they are pothead rabble-rousers. They are dedicated to ending the drug war so they can bankrupt the drug gangs, replace a  90 year old racist criminal justice system and provide compassionate rehabilitation to the marginalized in society.

Adolph Hitler showed the world what the endgame of  Darwinian Eugenic philosophy looks like after learning it from America. So you see, Weston, this has nothing to do with how inherently dangerous a plant is. It's about how dangerous it has been for minorities because of how racists have used a plant against them. Weston doesn't want to hear that there are better solutions to the drug problem. So he doesn't listen for them and he doesn't tell you about them and he certainly doesn't provide the evidence that they are working in other countries. What "activists" have done for America over the last couple decades is make headway in slowly steering the colossal bureaucracy of the United States government in a better direction.  The question is, can a church with an ungodly governing structure not held accountable to it's providers, be brought to a Jesus moment on this? Or will the Jim Crow Church of God, founded by a racist and incestuous pedophile, continue to ignorantly and willfully refuse to be woke?

V

Division is the New Unity

The COGWA Winter Family Weekend was a blast from a fellowship perspective. I even ran into old friends I haven't seen in over 20 years. This happens because so many of us have been playing musical chairs in the splinters since the 90's. I would never dismiss anyone's experience and criticism of the church but for my own experience, the average member in these churches is a God-fearing Christian that is just trying to do what they believe is pleasing to God and usually has a genuine affection toward others. I have never had a major conflict with anyone in the churches of God, including the ministers (save one, years ago). Many are just nice people that are fun to be around and party with, including the ministers. (Again, my own experience)

The theme at the WFW was "Unity" and I definitely felt unified with the brethren as I talked with old friends and made new acquaintances.  There was a general sense among all the brethren I spoke to that all the competing churches of God are generally the same. (This would not include the personality cults like Pack and Flurry) But this was, as I expected, not going to be the message of unity that would come from COGWA HQ.

[WARNING: What follows is going to come across as very harsh and cynical but only because I believe the churches of God  need a heavy dose of horribly tasting medicine and a prescription for a cure. Major "trigger warning" for those who love the church as I do but are still incapable of dealing with cognitive dissonance and facing reality.]

I have spent years in LCG being told at Feasts, winter weekends and must-plays from HQ that "We are NOT all the same!" All this did was prompt me to study and determine if this was actually true. I found most of the claims that made us different to be petty and the ones made that were seemingly important, I sometimes determined LCG to be the splinter in error. That being said, the cry for unity and all speaking the same thing from the ministry has always been a subjective cluster-

How much unity does it take to qualify to be unity until it's not and then there must be division for the sake of unity? If you ask the average member, it seems the bar is set much lower than those who claim to have the rule over them. The ministry would argue that such a low standard is set by lukewarm sheep. Maybe the standard is set too high by graceless shepherds concerned more about self-preservation.

In the very first seminar I sat in on, David Johnson made a not-so-veiled attack on 3 LCG teachings. The message was, don't go looking at LCG because:

1. They have an inordinate emphasis on the Ezekiel warning.
2. Dick Ames has a personalized version of the wedding supper. (Johnson tries to relate this to the rapture)
3. Doug Winnail thinks the "falling away" may be a general and global rejection of Western Civilization rooted in Christian ethics.

After this, came the usual threats and warnings of being deceived, even by "brethren" and family members (very unifying). He even concluded with a classic "Ames" tactic by shaming people who are not consuming organizational literature and webcast productions.

Regardless of one's position on those three points, what do they have to do with the gospel and the need for salvation?

Next up was a seminar by Joel Meeker who set up the classic straw man argument "proving" church government using Hebrews 10:25. He goes on to say that you must have a pastor and that we are commanded to attend holy convocations and have no choice. I haven't found any commanded assemblies in the New Covenant, Joel.

Joel then creates a list of "duties" for church administration and a list of "duties" for the members. He said the church is an organization and the organization organizes (brilliant). The church supports doctrine and protects us dummies from tricky men. When people leave the organization, it is always over "quarky" doctrine (I see what you did there, Joel). The church instructs, strengthens, comforts, encourages, protects, anoints and even provides physical needs because sheep faithfully tithe. Wow Joel! I guess when you put it that way, where would we be without you?

The duties of the sheep are to pray, study, fast, repent, think (how did that get in there) meditate, plan, and discern. This is where he took the time to flatter everyone in COGWA because they had the "spiritual discernment" to recognize UCG had "called good, evil and evil, good" and went with the holy men of COGWA who enacted division. He finished this list by warning us that everyone gets hurt by the church at some point but it is the duty of sheep to suck it up, persevere, watch your attitude and avoid a root of bitterness.

He concludes by attacking "those who would say that we [churches of god organizations] are all the same" using a real doozy of a straw-man argument. He goes to Revelation 2-3, points out they are all church of God and asks, does that mean you would not care which one you were in...that any one would do...are they all the same? (well played, Joel...well played) This obviously implies that the church really is an organization that we would call COGWA  and to go sniffing around anywhere else would be spiritual suicide. Yep...unity be the theme.

Next up, the captain of the ship, Jim Franks. Let's see. The smack-down was already put on LCG and UCG. Who would be next?

Franks starts by asking what one body means and what does unity look like. Ever the masters of double-speak, he humbly claims not to know. And then, I kid you not, he  references a class offered at their Foundation Institute that explains all the doctrinal differences between all the churches of God!

Jim Franks mentions that he read a new book on the history of the Worldwide Church of God. He didn't give the title but based on the sermon, I would guess he was referencing "The Fragmentation of a Sect: Schism in The Worldwide Church of God" written by David V. Barrett, PhD in Sociology. This caused him to wax nostalgically about the good ole days like when, for example, in 1967, the whole church was unified in praying God would heal Loma Armstrong (and then she died a week later). He said the church always had issues through the 60's, 70's, 80's and early 90's but "it was still one body!"

In a shaken voice, he described what it was like being bullied by the Tkach administration that was changing everything. When he told them he did not understand the new teachings, they told him to just preach it first and you will come to believe it later. He compared his firing to being put on a cattle train headed for Auschwitz! Is this the response you would expect from a man that fears God more than losing his paycheck? I have actually lost jobs or lost job opportunities because of the Sabbath and never once felt I was on my way to Auschwitz. It truly amazes me to see it on display, how earth-shattering it was for (some) ministers to face financial difficulty but make light of it when brethren have routinely lived it, often expressing great faith in going through it (even if misplaced). Who did you think you were, Elijah on the run for his life?! Maybe you felt like you were in a cattle train headed for Auschwitz because that is how the top down-hierarchical structure with a narcissist pope you thrived in, operated for decades.

He goes on to argue that in order for the church to be unified, it must be unified in doctrine, purpose and behavior. But his main emphasis was almost exclusively on doctrine as he took time to attack Tkach and the changes they made and attributing the reason for the changes was because the new WCG did not value truth. I thought, you may not have agreed with the changes but you cannot  say the changes were because they did not value truth. What is truth? They certainly no longer valued Herbert Armstrong's truth, to be sure.

It is clear that to Jim Franks, unity is everyone in one corporate entity and he lays all the blame for all the splinters at the feet of Joe Tkach. But as I pointed out in my post, "Who Causes Division" David Barrett says all splits in WCG to the present various  churches of God could only be caused and were caused by the ministry. On pages 208-209:

"But in a family of churches where top-down authority has always been the norm...members were expected to follow their ministers."

"...it is primarily ministers who have actively left one church to join or to found another, and in many cases they took their members with them."

"...it is a feature of established sects that schism comes only from the divisions among the influential elite within each movement; no other person is sufficiently influential to cause division..."

"Schism must thus be from the ministerial ranks, and in particular from those at the center of the organization; the laity are too receptive and docile (accustomed to obedience) to initiate schisms, and have no opportunity to preach heresy, or to challenge organizational arrangement." 

Take note: Barrett says division in the churches of God come particularly from those at the "center [HQ] of the organizations" and the "influential elite." Preaching unity to the laity, and  most of the field ministers, is preaching to the choir. We get it better than you! Unity is a message that must be preached TO these HQ administrations, not BY these HQ administrations. “Divisions” in Jude 19 is APODIORIZO: which means, false teachers that cause division.

It's funny but, agree with him or not, at least Joe Tkach had fundamental change as reason for blowing up the cult. What are the  reasons that Jim Franks, Gerald Weston and Victor Kubik have for continuing to promote division? What fundamental, irreconcilable differences exist between them?

Then, just like Johnson, in a spirit of unity, he laid out 3 differences between COGWA and COG7D that justifies being divided:

1. They reject British-Israelism
2. They reject the annual holy days
3. They believe it is "the" day of salvation instead of "a"

Again, I will let you decide if this is of any salvational consequence.

I want to conclude with some things Mark Winner said in his seminar because I believe it gets to the root problem with the churches of God. Mark says in order for us to be unified, we must be less interested in our own ideas and more interested in God's ideas. I have been around long enough to know that "God's ideas" is code for what HQ determines is God's ideas.

He went on to actually say at a Winter Family Weekend where unity was the theme, that "focusing on what we have more in common takes us away from what God would have us to know." Really, Mark? Focusing on what unifies us separates us from God?

The one thing I heard all week that rang most true is when Mark said "unity and arrogance cannot coexist." Well, God bless you, Mark! That is exactly why division will always be unity in the eyes of those beholden to a corporate business model.

Peter told the brethren to grow in the "grace and knowledge" of Jesus Christ. Because the Adventist Movement has been Gnostic from it's inception, it has  an inordinate focus on knowledge (and foreknowledge) and has fallen flat on it's face concerning grace. Paul said if he had all knowledge and prophecy but had not love, he had nothing. Grace is the key ingredient needed for true unity because grace understands that everyone is not in the same place concerning knowledge at any given time. Each person is a unique library of knowledge and understanding unto themselves that grows daily.  Knowledge "puffs up" in and by itself but grace allows people to be where they and others are in the learning process without judgment and condemnation. Grace is what enables us to work out our own salvation, individually. Grace is what makes way for us to dwell peaceably with all men and enjoy one another in a spirit of unity, despite which splinter we attend. And maybe most importantly, grace is what enables us to actually learn from someone else and God forbid, even change our minds.

Knowledge, even "right" knowledge, without grace can be a stumbling block for those looking to embrace that knowledge and can cause offence. You know what Jesus said about being offensive.

Did you notice in Joel's list of duties, the brethren are not to be easily offended and to suck it up but there was nothing about the administration having a duty to not be offensive? Christ has a stern warning for those who cause offence in Matthew 18.

In Matthew 20:25-28, Jesus provided the model necessary for the proper functioning of the church that would organically suppress the always-present effects of arrogance, greed and abuse. WCG, LCG, UCG and COGWA have all chosen to directly disobey Christ and establish organizations He specifically warned them against establishing.

The context of Jude is a stern warning to be on the lookout for false teachers and leaders that cause division for they (Verse 11)  “have run greedily in the error of Balaam for profit…” Add money to the mix and we now have a very toxic soup of arrogance, greed and abuse that largely goes unchecked every time you leave human power unchecked.

Again, I ask, what fundamental, irreconcilable differences exist between LCG, UCG, COGWA and even COG7D? In the business world, competitors often come from within an existing business where they learned the business. The competitor goes across the street and establishes a competing business that is fundamentally the same but with the "belief" that they are a little better or they have improved the product or service. There is no fundamental difference in the product or service, only the belief by the competition that they can perform the same service or produce the same product better or cheaper to increase profit margins. Every corporate entity is filled with a certain number of employees that believe they are better suited to lead and run the company. So they begin the climb of the corporate ladder or strike out across the street to compete.

And of course, the other driving factor to compete is the realization that the guy at the top is taking the largest cut, making money off the labor of those under him. There is nothing wrong with this per se, but is this something God would want as motivation in the "body of Christ?"

Businesses incorporate several methods to try and keep their best employees from becoming the competition or leaving to work for the competition. One of them are team building retreats. This is where the business throws a team-building party complete with seminars designed to propagandize and fun events to whip up endorphins in hopes that it will unify the help amongst themselves and with HQ while widening the gulf between the competition. By the time the retreat is over, it is hoped that those capable of competing are too happy to put in the work to compete and that they are convinced that the existing competition is inferior and not worthy of their effort.

Every business exists to get a certain percentage of your income in their pocket. Can you think of a business more lucrative than one that is able to siphon upwards of 30% or more from each customer's total income with no money-back guarantees, no product-performance expectations and the backing of a god who will rain down punishment on anyone who puts their hands to their corporate plow-share only to turn back? A business that is protected by the government, pays no taxes and is not required to make a profit, show a return on investment or present any positive fruits to justify existing?

 The unbiblical structure of the organizations and the unbiblical collection of tithes is supported by a false unity rooted in the arrogance of special knowledge. A ministry dependent on money will always market division as unity to protect the corporate entity. The church is not a business to be owned and controlled by wolves on Wall Street but that is what Herbert created; his own Information Marketing business cloaked in his own personalized Bible-speak. That cannot and never will fulfill the definition of the "body of Christ."

So the COGWA business retreat was fantastic. I got an endorphin fix from the fellowship. The adult beverages flowed late into every night, including the sabbath. As far as the seminars go, I have no clue how successful they are on the brethren. What I hope is only few brethren are making their decisions on which COG to attend based on petty doctrinal differences.  It is more probable those decisions are (nowadays) locally oriented and being based on where family members are, where friends are, where kids are so that our kids have friends. Who is providing more opportunities for the kids and who is throwing the best parties. I think this is blow-back from years of forcing brethren to live in a continuous state of urgency, never allowing people to be apart of life "out there." Never allowing us to take root in our communities, build church halls and actually have opportunities to love our neighbors.

Future seminars, sermons and feast messages will try to convince us making corporate decisions based on that kind of criteria is Laodicean or worse, showing ones self to be a "tare among the wheat." Whatever. The messages were disappointing as expected. I just didn't expect them to be that so blatantly bad! But I wonder. Does this show how "puffed up" and obnoxiously confident they are in the "unity" they have manufactured or does it expose just how fearful they are of the statistics showing the movement is continuing to dwindle with deaths out-pacing births, with no new prospects and the next generation saying, "I'm out"?

Either way, I expect the ante to continue to rise. More corporate retreats will be implemented with bigger and better bells and whistles. More camps, more dances, more adult beverages. Maybe a Hezekiah-type declaration to keep the Feast for two weeks! We are witnessing a church of God "Cold War" to see who will out-spend the competition to sop up the remaining tithe-payers of a dying movement. The winner will be the corporate entity that gives back the most dollars they whored for.

My advice: The failing business model of post-Herb splinters don't need a "prophet" (sorry, Bob). They need "The Profit" Marcus Lemonis, who rescues small businesses on CNBC because you are definitely not the body of Christ. That distinction is reserved for those spirit-led individuals that exemplify fruits of the Holy Spirit, always precluding organization. Dr. Meredith used to yell, "You can't put God in a box!" It's true! And yet, WCG and all the splinters have been trying to lay the body of Christ to rest in corporate coffins for decades. Hello?


V

Symbol and Meaning

Symbol is something I have thought about for a long time. It goes back to studying marketing, branding and the use of symbol to project power, wealth, influence, solidarity and belief. The COGs love to criticize others for the use of symbols. An obvious example is the cross. The COGs say that the cross is a Pagan symbol that goes back to the worship of Tammuz in Babylon and other various Pagan connections. The COGs also mock the use of the cross as a symbol because it was a Roman instrument of cruelty and death. The "reasoning" goes that if Christ was killed with a machine gun or an electric chair, would Christians wear those around their necks?

It shows a fundamental ignorance of what symbol is, how it functions and why. The question I would ask is: Does a symbol define its meaning, purpose and use for people or do people define the meaning, purpose and use of a symbol? The obvious answer is that people define symbols. A symbol in and of itself cannot ascribe anything to itself. With that in mind, does it make any logical sense to try and attribute Pagan meaning to the cross for a people who decided that the cross represented the sacrifice and resurrection of their Savior? It does not.

Because individuals define symbols, it is an arrogant offence to tell someone else what a symbol should mean to them. Try going up to someone with a tattoo and tell him what his ink means and you will probably get a deserved punch in the face. And yet it is what the COGs do constantly in their "gospel" message and wonder why the church continues to shrink.

A day can be a symbol we attach meaning to. God defined what the seventh day was to mean to Israel. Saturn is a planet as well as a god and is commonly attributed to be a symbol of Satan. We even call the day "Saturday" and go to worship God on "Satansday" but if anyone was to try and use the kind of reasoning we do concerning the cross, for example, against us, we would be offended. We don't worship Satan or Saturn and they have nothing to do with the Sabbath and the God who defined its' meaning in the Old Covenant...as far as we are concerned.

When the COGs are criticized for having "Winter Family Weekends" at Christmas time, they  get offended. It has nothing to do with Christmas as far as they are concerned and they are correct. Yet! They will turn around every December and tell Christians who observe Christmas that they are celebrating a pagan holiday and somehow bolstering an ancient practice of roasting babies in fires and eating them like Babylonians or Canaanites did 4000 years ago or supporting drunken sexual orgies practiced at this time of year by Greeks and Romans 2000 years ago.

With no Sola Scriptura establishing time as a symbol in the New Covenant, Christians were free to set aside any time they chose for religious purposes. The Gentile Christians who were regularly assaulted by Jews and Jewish Christians about the Old Covenant, the Sabbath and circumcision, naturally developed an aversion to Saturday and an affinity toward Sunday as a day to get together since Paul started the custom to gather offerings for Jerusalem on Sundays and the Christians knew Jesus was resurrected on a Sunday.

I know Sunday-keepers today elevate Sunday in the way Jews elevate the Sabbath. But the early Christians did not transmigrate the symbolism, meaning and purpose of the Sabbath into another day (Sunday). Neither Christians, nor Pagans observed any day as a day of rest. Later generations of Christians chose to define what Sunday was to them and how to use it. Rome imposing its will and meaning on Sunday observance has no bearing on what it meant to Christians for 300 years beforehand.

It is interesting that the two annual observances that Christians did create was:

1. Celebrating the Resurrection (called "Easter" later)

2. Celebrating the Incarnation (called "Christmas" later)

Both observations are practiced annually by Christianity but largely ignored by COGs. I don't think I have ever heard a minister rehearse the Incarnation in a sermon. And the only time I hear sermons concerning the resurrection is to simply try to prove that a Friday crucifixion-Sunday resurrection is wrong. Look at what Paul says in I Corinthians 15:1-4

"Now brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to Scriptures, that he was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." 

Paul says this is the most important part of Christianity and this is exactly what is embodied in the observance of Easter and Christmas every year. The COG's two annual main focuses are on Jesus being the Passover Lamb acknowledging His death and His prophetic return as King of Kings. Not saying this is wrong but is it any better than a focus on the Incarnation and Resurrection?


Focus on prophecy was confusing people in Thessalonica (II Thess. 2). Paul and Peter both had to walk back their false assumptions about the immediacy of prophecy. COG focus has always been Old Covenant (Seventh Day) and Prophecy (Adventists) which, in my opinion, has only brought back into focus, first century confusion caused by Jewish Christians, no matter how well-meaning.

If you consider Judaism and Mainstream Christianity at opposite ends of a spectrum, the COGs seem to exist somewhere in a confused middle because they refuse to articulate a clean break from the Old Covenant. Supposing all three positions miss the mark, where is the sweet spot? Some think it's inching closer to Judaism. We see it in a growing Hebrew Roots Movement. I know some here would say completely off the spectrum. I personally lean closer to mainstream Christian scholarship and historical research instead of HWA's 6 month library study but fully realizing fundamental flaws in Catholic and Protestant doctrines.

I think if Paul were around today, he would be telling us all to leave each other alone about the observance of days. I feel no inclination to observe Easter, Christmas or Sunday but I also see no benefit in harassing well meaning Christians that do. Some may say I am wandering too far off the COG farm but I would just ask anyone with eyes to see if they see the churches of God growing in grace or knowledge or in fruits of the spirit? Have we set any better of an example of what Christianity should be than Catholics or Protestants? Since growth in the "work" was established as a measuring stick by HWA, is there growth in the works being done by the petty, infighting, AC alumni we call ministers?


The unpleasant truth is we are the descendants of an Adventist Movement started 176 years ago on the foundation of a false prophesy and that has continued to provide additional false prophets along the way. Are we really "the" church or are we just "a" church? Are we really a church or are we the dying aftermath of a personality cult? If we are a dying remnant of a cult, can we be salvaged and reformed into a church? Should we seek to be grafted back into the parent church started by Gilbert Cranmer? Will the church of God movement as it exists right now, spread a Sola Scriptura gospel to the whole world and usher in the return of Christ?

"Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to dispute over doubtful things...Who are you to judge another's servant?...One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind...He who observes a day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe a day to the Lord, he does not observe it...But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother?" --Romans 14:1, 4, 5-6, 10

I think everyone under the fundamentalist umbrella trip over themselves because they all declare Sola Scriptura but no one actually abides by it rationally, nor accept that Scripture does not plainly answer many questions. Approaching the Bible with a spirit of grace allows us to  accept our vast ignorance and resist telling everyone else what's what. Sola Scriptura in the hands of narcissists and psychopaths is a "thus sayeth the Lord" cat o' nine tails in each competing and divided church of God that demands their work be your god, their thoughts be your meditations, their cross be your burden, their days be your idols, their private interpretations be your doctrines and their every precious heresy be your sin; sucking the free will out of hapless souls over doubtful things.


Gerald Weston used his Winter Weekend message to attack tattoos and vaping again. But I digress.


V

Spreading Christmas Shade

Growing up in an irreligious home, I hardly saw a connection between Jesus and Christmas. I could tell even as a young teen that it was more about marketing to maintain the health of a consumer-based economy. So when I turned into COG-land in college and was told Christmas was pagan and should not be observed, it was an easy sell. 

But what always struck me as bizarre was the sheer vitriol expressed by church members toward the holiday and those that celebrated it. The historical arguments tying every little element of the season directly to rank paganism and Mystery Babylon the Great, while interesting, failed in bolstering their arguments with direct Scripture. I learned later that there was another school of thought with compelling historical evidence that first and second century Christians were observing Sundays and celebrating the birth and resurrection of Christ, completely unrelated to paganism. In fact, paganism specifically related to the Roman cult of Sol Invictus was not part of the Roman culture until the fourth century. This would suggest that Roman paganism had very little influence on Christianity for three centuries. And from a logical standpoint, it makes no sense that Christians were regularly filling the first chapters of Fox's book of martyrs if they were socially engineering the empire, syncretizing with their persecutors.

For years, I've watched ministerial wannabe's parade up to the lecturn every December with sermonettes to end all sermonettes on the greatest evil to ever befall mankind. In between all their spit and rage, I would have to ask myself: what does roasting babies in Babylon have to do with present-day Christians like my brother and his lovely family who partake of normal family rituals like eating together, singing together and worshipping together at a time when they all acknowledge that Jesus was the Christ that came in the flesh? He was born a man and every year, Christians re-enact nativity scenes, acknowledging that belief.

I was surprised when I came across an article by COGWA about Christmas this year that was trying to take a rather new (to me) and novel approach to throwing shade at Christmas.

The title, "The Incarnation: How Christmas Hides Its Meaning" caught my attention. Mike Bennett asks, "If Christmas is really about the birth of the Son of God, why do so many concentrate on Christmas shopping and whitewashed pagan customs, while so few focus on the incredible, life-changing truth of the incarnation?"

Mike goes on to argue that very few people focus on the incarnation of Jesus. His evidence is all the extras surrounding the holiday and the growing number of secularists around the globe who could care less about the incarnation.

While all of that is true, what Mike fails to realize is that people who do consider themselves devout Christians, DO, in fact, care about the incarnation and do put that at the center of their observance. Every year, my brother's family (even if not historically or Biblically accurate completely) re-enact the nativity story at their church. There is absolutely nothing about their Christmas observance that hides the "incredible, life-changing truth of the incarnation."

What is fantastically ironic about Mike's attempt at throwing shade at the holiday, only highlights how the COG's never celebrate or acknowledge the incarnation  whereas Christians observing Christmas, rehearse that truth every single year without the prompting of Scripture. How is celebrating Christ's birthday, the incarnation (not solicited in Scripture) actually any different from Armstrongists that observe Independence Day and Thanksgiving (not solicited in Scripture) to honor God or Jews that observe Purim and Hanukkah to honor God for delivering them from their enemies?

120 years of additional research and scholarship has transpired since the Adventist movement took aim at everything Catholic as being directly adopted from the Babylonian Mystery religions. There is evidence that suggests Christians adopted Sunday and celebrated the Resurrection and the Birth of Christ within the first 100 years and it had nothing to do with the paganism and secularism that surrounded and persecuted them. Were they man-made observances not sanctioned by Scripture? YES! Does that automatically make them pagan? NO! Not anymore pagan than Thanksgiving that Armstrongites observe or Hanukkah that Jesus and His apostles observed.

HWA and his followers have always used various forms of faulty logic.  "Dichotomous reasoning" is a COG mainstay  used to proffer "proof" for some of the faulty doctrines in the church. This is the faulty logic whereas everything is black or white, all or nothing. A two-dimensional worldview that is symptomatic of many forms of psychosis and various personality disorders.

COG's love to quote Jude when he exhorts the brethren to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." This faith, they claim, is the same truths HWA restored to Christianity after 1900 years. Ignoring Biblical and historical context, another mainstay of Armstrong theology, has left them in the dark whereas scholars have been shedding light  through dark glass since the invention of the printing press.

What was the faith that needed to be contended for so earnestly? What was the biggest threat to Christianity at the close of the first century after the death of all the original apostles, save John?

I was shocked to learn that at the time of Christ, Judaism was the only religion, philosophy, worldview and culture on the whole planet that believed  or ever believed that physical fleshly life could be restored from death. This belief of a resurrection from the dead is what was "foolishness" to the Greek. The centerpiece to Christianity is accentuated by Paul in I Corinthians 15:1-4

"Now brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to Scriptures, that he was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures."

Paul goes on to list all of the eye-witnesses to the resurrected Jesus. We can see among Gentiles during Paul's apostleship, the resurrection of Jesus in the flesh was already in question 20-30 years after His death and resurrection. John tells us what was being questioned and in doubt 60 years after what Jesus accomplished in I John 2:18-23 and says plainly in 2 John 7, "I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is a deceiver and an antichrist." Jude says ungodly men are turning grace into license to sin and deny the Christ.

It does seem to appear that the biggest problem Christianity faced at the beginning was the unbelief that Christ came in the flesh as a man, died, and was resurrected in the flesh. This makes perfect sense. Once a generation arose that did not have first-hand experience with Jesus, it only stands to reason that it now may be taken by the next generation and new adherents from a non-Jewish view that compromising ideas would arise to account for who and what Jesus was and what actually happened. 

What literally came into question was the incarnation. This may be why there is evidence as early as the early 2nd century of Christians observing the birth of Christ. This was an annual acknowledgment in their faith of the incarnation that many were doubting and began filling the ranks of a new Gnostic Christianity.

This is a valid working theory that is fitting with our addition of scholarship and research over the  last 120 years. For all of the shade the Adventist Movement has thrown at Christmas down to this very week, is it even possible that the COG's could revisit the topic and reconsider just how awful they have been in portraying fellow Christians all these years?

My own opinion is that Christmas is no different from other man-made holidays that have non-pagan foundations. That means we are free to take it or leave it. I stopped observing the holiday as a teenager for non-religious reasons. I will continue to do so but without passing judgment on fellow Christians who do so for reasons completely unrelated to roasting babies in fires and participating in drunken orgies.

V

Why the Church?

In the latest Living Church News, Gerald Weston asks in his editorial, "Why the Church?" It is a good question and as anyone who has been in the COG's knows, answering "personal salvation" is a selfish, lazy and damnable answer.

"Despite this wonderful news about our future, many are surprised to learn that our personal salvation is not  [emphasis, Gerald's] the main reason why God is calling people in this present age."

"Isn't that [personal salvation] enough?" many will ask? The answer is an emphatic No!"

"Jesus gave His followers a great commission, articulated in Mark 16:15-16 and Matthew 28:18-20. As we have this divine commission as Christ's followers, is it okay to choose not  [again, emphasis, Gerald's]  to take an active part in fulfilling it? Paul tells us that Jesus said, "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35). Our Savior expects us to show outgoing concern for others. We must not sit back and wait for the Kingdom to come, as is the manner of some."

He goes on to equivocate the wise and faithful servant as being the one spreading the gospel of the good news AND  trumpeting the "Ezekiel Warning" to the filthy house of Anglo-American Israel that has never been so wicked in all it's history as it is right now! And, of course, since you know the Living Church of God is the only qualified organization on earth to fulfill this God-given role at this end-time, you would be remiss not to support such a Work and can count on untold suffering and death if you don't.

"Warn and walk away" is not what Jesus instructed...It should be evident that the Church is both to give the good news and to warn, with the hope that some will repent."

Because we all know when we do the work...and someone repents...this is called...personal salva-

"Some who consider themselves part of the Church of God have disputed this point-either actively by misinterpreting the words of Scripture and proclaiming that there is nothing for us to do, or passively through laziness and inaction. So, are we to 'wait it out' until Christ returns, or are we to do a work?" 

Gerald belittles those who may think Herb finished the work and we are simply to prepare the bride by saying these folks use "one-third of one verse" [Rev.19:7] as proof. Then he can't resist invoking the idol in closing:

"Mr. Herbert Armstrong died in January of 1986--about 34 years ago. Most people alive today know nothing of him. Two whole generations have grown up since his death. We are thankful for what he did, but we must follow his example and be found so doing."

COG ministers love to use the either/or fallacy. You either support my organization or you are lazy. You do the work as we define and direct you to support or you are an inactive Christian worthy of the flood Satan will be spewing from his mouth in 3 to 5 years. Seriously, who goes around saying Christians have nothing to do? The truth is you just don't like Christians who go around saying we don't have to do what "you" want us to do.

Herb claimed that he was commissioned by God to fulfill Matthew 24:14 and I find it interesting that Gerald stayed away from that verse and instead referenced Mark 16:15-16 and coupled it with the "Ezekiel Warning."  How do we follow in Herb's footsteps? Should we proclaim Matthew 24:14 which would be going on 100 years now?

You bragged about the churches prowess in prophecy in the "Behind the Work" video at the feast. Are you going to follow Herb's lead and make wild prophetic announcements that backfire in epic proportions? How about sending faithful tithe payers threatening letters to send in special offerings needed for a "final push"? Should you buy a jet and bribe Prince Andrew for a photo-op? We could probably use another Elijah about now to get things going.

What all COG's have always failed to realize is that the purpose of the church and the 'work' is [emphasis mine] personal salvation at its genesis and its core. To rejoice with the angels in Heaven when one sinner repents. Personal salvation is then supposed to inspire personal evangelism, utilizing the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The goal (why the church?) is to fulfill Matthew 25:31-46. What the church should look like is a collection of spirit-filled individuals with out-flowing love and concern for humanity in their own spheres of influence. The church should be a  public pillar in every community instead of a religious roach hiding in rented basements.

If the work you do in "spreading the gospel" does not begin with personal salvation and end in  fruits produced by personal evangelism, then what kind of work is it? 

I believed in the work of the Living Church of God and supported it faithfully with tithes and offerings for over two decades. I believed Dr. Meredith when he said we were the "spear-point" of the work. Dr. Meredith was his own kind of buffoon but he at least put forth pretense to do a work.

In 2009, I bragged about the work LCG was doing compared to UCG. (Thanks for the numbers, Bawana Bob):

• LCG:   Preaching the gospel:  45%     Feeding the flock:   47%
• UCG:   Preaching the gospel   24%     Feeding the flock:   56%

I used this as evidence that all the COG's should be in LCG. A year later when UCG imploded, I screamed, SEE! Surely now, God will bless LCG and show the world who was going to do the 'work!'

Fast forward 10 years to 2019. You have the nerve to publish an editorial shaming people into increasing support in "your" work because you claim it is the ultimate expression in love toward others. Then on p.13 in the very same issue, you produce a pie chart showing where tithe money went in 2018.

• LCG:   Preaching the gospel:   34%     Feeding the flock:   58%

In the January, 1995 edition of our booklet, “When Should You Follow Church Government” RCM states that the church has over 7,000 people hearing sermons every Sabbath with over 60 ministers and elders around the world. He finishes with this on p.41, “We are growing every single month! This is God’s doing! He is blessing us because we are seeking to do His will in a genuine, heartfelt manner.”

25 years is a long time to grow every single month. How have we done? Current estimate is 10,000 in weekly attendance. 3,000 in 25 years. 42.9% increase overall. Factor in birth/death rate and take out those who are playing musical chairs between the COG's and are not "new" converts and you have a growth rate between 0.2-0.8% per annum. To put that into perspective, even the  Catholic church with a billion members, still grows at 1.5% per annum.

Back in 1995, Dr. Meredith said he had 60 ministers and not all of them were on the payroll. Today, we have over 200. That is a 233% increase overall. In 1995, there were 117 members to each minister. In 2019, there are 50 members to each minister.

We all know what "feeding the flock" means. Add in the 7% that goes to Administration and 2/3 of all tithes and offerings go to paying ministerial salaries, mortgages, fleet cars, food, clothing and the Ambassador College retirement fund.

Gerald writes:

"We may think of the Parable of the Minas in terms of developing ourselves personally rather than in terms of multiplying our minas outwardly. And what happens to the man who does nothing with his mina?"

The COG's take minas and consume them upon themselves. And then tell the providers of those minas to bury what they have from Christ because they are not qualified to use them.

"But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in." --Matthew 23:13

Your message is dead and year after year, you gather in your ministerial conferences, throw your arms in the air and make excuses like, "we can't figure out how to reach millenials" and "people are increasingly evil in this end time" and "we are not in the conversion business" and "real growth will be in the millenium."

You said, "We must not sit back and wait for the Kingdom to come, as is the manner of some." Does the evidence not show this is exactly what LCG is doing?

It is clear what the real work is in these dying COG organizations. I call on all brethren to stop paying unbiblical tithes and demand accountability from men who have proven over time to be unjust stewards. Declare, as the parable says, you can no longer be steward. In fact, any leader in the COG's today that was a minister in the 70's and was not fired for being a "liberal" at that time, should be retired immediately. These old men have proven to be the most unfit and unqualified men to lead according to biblical requirements. Send Ames, Weston and Winnail to Hawaii. A time-table should be established to remove the field ministry from the payroll and be required to seek employment like everyone else in the real world. Those who leave the ministry because it no longer comes with a paycheck will simply prove they were never shepherds. Dismantle the Roman Catholic governing structure and replace it with New Testament Congregationalism. Develop a Christ-centered message rooted in love that inspires growth in the body and inspires blessings to be poured out on all people.

Good stewards produce a return on investment. In 25 years, you have no fruit to speak of and the organization is clearly trending away from that which you pay lip service to. The real church (Gerald) does not require that I or anyone else support your painfully out-dated 'gospel', your flat, dead presentations, your pompous telecasts, and your inability to communicate with today's humanity. The real church is following in the footsteps of Jesus, not Herb.

Why the Church? I guess it depends who you ask.

V