Matching Tracksuits

xcg

The End of What?

Sunday 11 October 2020

Press Release - Radio Interview with David C. Pack

Just a little over a week ago, religious huckster and conman David Pack said that Jesus would be coming back by the end of his group’s little religious retreat known as the Feast of Tabernacles. He was absolutely sure it would happen during that convention, and in a sermon leaked onto the internet that he gave during the first day, he said he would be shocked if they made it halfway through the conference before Jesus returned. As Wednesday rolled into Thursday, marking the halfway mark, I wondered what he was saying to his flock. “Just wait — I know it’s coming!” Who knows.

Well, the whole conference is over. Everyone was heading back to their homes today despite Pack’s assurance during his first-day sermon that they wouldn’t be going back home. Are they finally beginning to doubt the man? Are they going to leave his group?

The fallout will be interesting to watch, but it certainly is not without tragedy. Members of this group have given everything to this man. They’ve signed over their homes to them. They’ve taken out loans to send him the money. As with the Branch Davidians or the People’s Temple, they’ve surrendered their whole lives to this man in the belief that he is God’s appointed one on Earth, an apostle on the same level as the New Testament apostles. I don’t think they will end with a firey confrontation with government officials or in a mass suicide, but that doesn’t make the tragedy insignificant: anyone who leaves this church would have to start all over. I’m not even sure they could stay in their houses if they signed them over to the church.

Gone Packing

Wednesday 23 September 2020

Ever since the Worldwide Church of God (WCG), the church I grew up in, made the changes that led it out of near-cult status and into traditional Protestant-ville, I’ve been fascinated with the resulting organizations that broke off from it in order to hold fast to the original teachings. None has been more fascinating to me than David Pack’s Restored Church of God (RCG), a little group based in Wadsworth, Ohio, consisting of a few thousand members at most (they’re tight-lipped about their membership numbers, but I’d guess they have fewer than 5,000 regular attendees) that is certain it’s the only truly Christian organization on the planet. They believe that they will become God as God is God — that God is a family not just a trinity and that people can become part of that family, thereby becoming a god themselves.

It is, to say the least, a very heterodox group.

Yet in the world of WCG offshoots, it has insisted that it and it alone has remained true to the founder’s original teachings. Of course, every other group has maintained that, too, but the RCG has done it most vociferously. But no one can remain static forever, and the realities on the ground forced various doctrinal changes. Course corrections, Pack might call them.

Recently, a website published some letters from inside that church, though, that shows that all is not well in RCG-ville, that Pack is making changes that have to be seen to be believed. It starts with accusations that the bloke leaving, the whistleblower for lack of a better term, of course, had a bad attitude. Had problems with leadership. Did not know how to follow God’s government.

Church Administration

Sun 2020-09-20 5:46 PM

Dear brethren,

Greetings from Headquarters. We trust that you had a profitable day of Trumpets. The Work continues to surge forward despite a world growing darker.

Yesterday evening, some of you received an email from either Brian Kaidannek or his son Greg, stating they are no longer in agreement with the teachings of God’s Church. These emails came not long after Mr. Pack’s recent comments were posted. Sadly, it appears that Brian Kaidannek followed his son out of the Church. Both men chose to forsake the assembling of themselves together on Trumpets, using the Holy Day to send divisive letters to their pastorates.

As has been the case with several other former ministers, their emails were the first indications of any disagreement. They now claim disagreement with scores of teachings, several going back to the very beginning of the series. Greg Kaidannek says that he once believed that The Restored Church of God was God’s Church yet does not explain when it ceased to be or where His Church is currently (of course, a unified Church will always exist somewhere on Earth—Matthew 16:18Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)).

Brethren, it is sad for us to see any of God’s Sheep stray from the path. Your thoughts go out to the children who are now isolated. We serve a merciful God, but these divisive letters put these men on dangerous ground.

Though filled with error on even basic understanding, Greg Kaidannek’s letter is long and reasonably well written, proving much time and thought. He admitted thinking long and hard about writing it. Yet shocking to everyone here at Headquarters, he never uttered any concerns. The Headquarters’ contact for both of these men spoke with them biweekly. They had abundant opportunities to express disagreement or confusion but never did.

Greg Kaidannek’s portrayal of his time at Headquarters is flat wrong. As one who has been in scores of meetings, there is always a chance to ask questions. His problem was not questions; it was attitude. Personal spiritual issues (not prophecy) led to him being demoted in rank (which rarely happens) and given a field assignment over a small congregation. God is patient and merciful, so we hoped that this correction and re-assignment would help him develop the heart of a shepherd and learn to focus on others. His letter made it evident that he chose not to address his problems, but instead justified his transfer and allowed bitterness to set in.

Brian Kaidannek was fully aware of his son’s issues. He agreed this was the right move to help him. In private discussions at Headquarters, we were concerned that if Greg Kaidannek left, his father would follow him. Again, sadly, this proved accurate.

Brethren, please understand that the ministry must walk a fine line when giving you details when someone leaves. People can repent, and we hope and pray they do. We share as little as possible to protect the flock. Much more could be said, but it should not be necessary. God’s Government works hard to help His flock (no matter their rank) to make it to the Kingdom. When someone leaves the Church, they are forced to make a choice: (1) Honestly admit they no longer wish to address their spiritual problems or (2) Invent a “righteous” justification for leaving God’s Church.

They said they were “standing for the truth,” but sat safely behind their computers and sent emails filled with error and confusion. Greg Kaidannek claims that men at Headquarters are “afraid” to speak up. Again, I can personally attest to men having various questions answered in each of these meetings. These men have had every opportunity to speak their minds, ask questions, bring up concerns and, based on the content of their emails, have disagreed with God’s Church for years.

These men claim that they believe God is in charge and that He is working out the final stages of His plan before Christ’s return. They also profess to believe there is not much time left in the age. Everyone here is at a loss about what so-called “plan” they believe God is working out. If it is not what we are learning, then what is it? They appear to indicate they are going back to the “big T.” That means the Kaidanneks are looking for ten kings to come together in an increasingly fracturing Europe—and it must happen soon to start a 3.5-year countdown.

It is hard to comprehend how anyone can be honest with the scriptures and return to what we once understood. These men lost focus on the big picture and allowed confusion and self-deception to take them out of God’s Church. They should be thankful that our Creator can still get their attention in the fire, and we may see them soon.

As the age comes to a close, we must fight allowing ourselves to “doze off.” The repeated warnings to not fall asleep are given for a reason! Stay vigilant, stay close to God and continue to make yourselves “ready” for Christ’s Return.

While we transition the pastorate, please feel free to reach out to Church Administration with any questions that arise.

Greg’s father, Brian Kaidannek, wrote a letter to members of the church (I guess members in his congregation?) in which he explained a few facts (emphasis mine):

From: Brian Kaidannek
Sent: September 19, 2020 9:05 PM

Subject: Hold Fast That Which is Good

Greetings brethren,

The time has come when I must speak. I am charged to protect the sheep from false teachings, and I can no more remain silent as the meaning of the Holydays comes under further attack. This is changing times and seasons. Leviticus 23 and Exodus 13 are plain scriptures which explain the spring Holydays and exactly when they occur. The Jews in Old Testament times confuse them, and that confusion remains to this day. Now we have followed suit. Mr. Pack has ignored what we all once knew that even is dusk or twilight, which is the time between sunset and darkness. There is only one even or evening in each day and it is at the beginning of the day. Look in Genesis where God says “… and the evening and the morning was the first day.” etc. Passover is completely separate from the NBTO. It is a violation of the rules of Bible study to go to an unclear scripture in Ezekiel and make a doctrine in the face of the clear scriptures mentioned above.

We have seen over the last few years how the teachings of a faithful apostle, who was the apostle to the Philadelphian era, an era which God had nothing bad to say about in Rev. 3, become destroyed and or altered. How could this era have been so wrong in it’s understanding? God’s Holydays have always been a map to God’s plan for mankind and we once clearly saw the meaning in each step of God’s plan reflected in each Holyday. Now the meaning of the fall holydays is muddied and therefore the understanding of God’s plan has been muddied. Ask yourself, what is the meaning of each of the 7 Holydays and Feasts. This is why we no longer have a Bible Introduction course to clearly explain them as we once did, because no one can!

We also now teach a Calvinistic type of predestination which was never taught in the previous era as this type of teaching will lead into even more heresy as time goes forward. Read our Predestination booklet, it still has it correct. Which leads me to a significant point. Our literature, in many cases, more closely reflects what we taught in the past and is far different from what is being taught in the church in sermons and so many come looking for a group that teaches what Mr. Armstrong taught and we now have a type of bait and switch going on. This is simply wrong!

One of the fundamental doctrines that only God’s church understood, different from all professing Christianity, was our knowledge of who the God of the Old Testament was: that God was the Word (Jesus Christ). This is why when Christ came as a man he came to reveal the Father. (Matthew 11:27, Luke 10:22) This lost truth has led to a mountain of error and confusion. Simply read Exodus 3:14: Moses is told the name of the God he was dealing with “I AM” and then read John 8:58: Where Christ says “… before Abraham was I AM”. Can it be any clearer. Don’t be deceived by clever manipulation of unclear scriptures, ignoring that which is most plain!

Mr. Pack, who declared last Feast of Tabernacles that he was a prophet and had been for some time then went on to make a plethora of predictions of when Christ would return, none of which obviously came to pass. Yes, he has said he had never claimed God spoke to him, that is true. But brethren do not ignore the clear warning in Deuteronomy 18:22: “When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.” Many times, we have heard, “On God’s authority, I am right!” He HAS spoken Presumptuously! And then to say he was foretold to be wrong is just foolishness. We do not serve a God of confusion! Recently he has stated he is not a prophet. When one says they are a prophet they are either a true or false prophet and later claiming not to be a prophet becomes a mute point. Now again Mr. Pack claims to be Elijah and a whole plethora of other titles; and has once again predicted that we can’t go past Thursday, just before Trumpets. Again his prediction failed and he proved himself false. How can we sit at the feet of, and listen to, this false prophet?

Many have said, “This is a test of our faith”, and to a degree that is true. But brethren this is not the first apostacy that I have encountered. I have heard this all before. If one continues to listen to heresy, one will eventually begin to absorb it. Do you wish to be the proverbial frog in the water and wait to be boiled to death?

World conditions are deteriorating around us and yes, we should watch as these do seem to be the beginning of sorrows and we all wish that the return of Jesus Christ will be soon. We are told to hold fast that which is good. What we are hearing IS NOT GOOD!

I know that this letter will find its way to HQs, and there will be a story spun putting me in a bad light, it has happened to many others before me. But you brethren know me and know I have always been straight with you, regardless of what is said of me. I hold no malice and I care for you all. It is for this reason that I am compelled to try to protect you from false teaching, regardless of where it comes from.

Have no illusions, I could be marked, and you told not to contact me. But I cannot remain silent any longer! Much, much more could be said but you know me, I always head straight to the point, so this warning is sufficient. Beware false doctrine!

Brethren during this confusion, a book I have found most helpful to remain grounded in the truth once delivered is “The Mystery of The Ages” by Mr. Armstrong. I recommend you find a copy and read it.

I love you all.

P.S Attached to this email is a document written by my son to his congregation which I think you will find helpful.

What an odd feeling to read this letter and realize that each of the bolded sections has a history behind it that could fill several pages, and that the changes associated with those passages could also fill several more pages, and that all this understanding that flashes through my mind is dependant on having the same silly background knowledge that I have and that even the phrases themselves are meaningless. These people have created their own world, with vocabulary that befuddles the average outsider and a layered history that informs that vocabulary and theology which outsiders know nothing about. It’s like a portal to another universe where fundamental laws of physics are different, only here it’s fundamental laws of logic that hold no meaning.

In Greg Kaidannek’s letter that his father Greg mentions above, there is a list of doctrinal changes that Pack has introduced over the last few years. Some of the items include:

  • Apostles can’t get doctrine wrong – i.e. infallibility.
  • Christ is returning to Wadsworth (Joseph) not Jerusalem.
  • King David disqualified himself and lost his role in the Kingdom and David Pack will assume it.
  • That Prophet – Elijah – DCP vs Christ.
  • Doing the Work is the Campus FIRST – then preaching a Gospel.

As with the bolded portions of the letter, these are ideas that to me hold significance. These are enormous changes. They are changes to fundamental doctrines that Pack said he would never abandon. However, with the exception of the first two items, most of these ideas are completely meaningless to outsiders.

Just how much has this guy changed things? Not that much, it turns out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asgSSILBxA8

He’s predicting the end of the age before the “Feast of Trumpets” (don’t ask) next year, which, according to the RCG’s calendar, is Sept. 7, 2021. (Oddly, even though the world is supposed to end on Sept. 7, 2021, their calendar of events extends into 2023…)

Christmas Tree

Monday 11 December 2017

It’s really such a silly idea, positively kitsch in a lot of ways: we cut down trees, bring them into our home, and hang silly baubles on it. For many, it’s more than that: it’s positively evil. Some Christians look at Jeremiah 10:2-5 as something of a condemnation of the Christmas tree. One religious group explains it thusly:

This passage states, “Thus says the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cuts a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither is it in them to do good.”

These verses illustrate an idol made out of wood. However, idols were also made out of other materials, such as stone, marble, etc. So this is not a comprehensive description of idol-making. More specifically, it speaks of Christmas tree-making, even as it is still done today.

A reference to the signs of heaven in verse 2 is better translated today as the winter solstice. Most people are unaware of the connection between Christmas and the winter solstice, and that the origin of the holiday is pagan. They observe it because of the customs in our society. We need to be aware of what some of the customs signify. In fact, we read in verse 2 above, “learn not the way of the heathen.” God commands us not to follow that way.

Although the scripture above undoubtedly reflects the ancient practices during Jeremiah’s time, we know that the book is also prophetic. Therefore, we ought to take it as an instruction for our day and age as well.

The use of such a tree amounts to idolatry. This is a transgression of God’s law, stated in Exodus 20:4-6. To learn more, you may wish to request our free booklet The True Origin of Christmas.

So it’s far from a harmless bit of cheesiness for some.

In The True Origin of Christmas, the author, David Pack, explains it thus:

No booklet about Christmas is complete without some explanation of the “Christmas tree.” We have touched on it without directly focusing on it. The modern Christmas tree originated in Germany. But the Germans got it from the Romans, who got it from the Babylonians and the Egyptians.

Like many articles from Pack, he fails to provide any documentation for the assertion that the Romans got it from the even more ancient sources. To be fair, there is something to Pack’s assertion:

The ancient Egyptians worshipped a god called Ra, who had the head of a hawk and wore the sun as a blazing disk in his crown. At the solstice, when Ra began to recover from the illness, the Egyptians filled their homes with green palm rushes which symbolized for them the triumph of life over death.

Early Romans marked the solstice with a feast called the Saturnalia in honor of Saturn, the god of agriculture. The Romans knew that the solstice meant that soon farms and orchards would be green and fruitful. To mark the occasion, they decorated their homes and temples with evergreen boughs. In Northern Europe the mysterious Druids, the priests of the ancient Celts, also decorated their temples with evergreen boughs as a symbol of everlasting life. The fierce Vikings in Scandinavia thought that evergreens were the special plant of the sun god, Balder. (The History Channel)

But Pack believes we’re just supposed to take his word for it. He is the authority.

By and large, it seems to be a tempest in a cliche. So it has pagan origins. So Christmas is a Christianization of solstace celebrations. So what? I find it hard to believe that an omnipotent being would care much about such relatively petty matters when I take into consideration all the other things he should be worried about.

Such considerations fail to take into account all the good that comes from it, the joy my family experiences sharing those couple of hours as we set up the tree, haul out the decorations, and get busy with hot cocoa and ornaments.

A Tragedy in the Making

Tuesday 10 March 2015

hwa
Herbert Armstrong

It had to happen. From the morning of January 16, 1986, it became an inevitability. When the charismatic leader of a religious organization dies, change is inevitable. I suppose it doesn’t have to be a particularly charismatic leader to necessitate change when he dies, but the more charismatic, the harder it is to maintain the same arch of theological development because so much of the theology is grounded in the leader’s personality, whether or not followers admit or even are aware of it.

When Herbert Armstrong (HWA) died in 1986, there was no way things could go on as they had before. The most basic reason was simple: everyone believed, implicitly or explicitly, that Armstrong would be alive until the end of time as we know it, until Jesus’s second coming. When he passed in his sleep without a single trumpet blast from heaven, without a chorus of angels announcing the return of God incarnate to Earth, it was the first of several inevitable changes in theology. When the new leadership began changing doctrinal distinctives like British-Israelism and the nature of God, the changes were simply too much for some who longed to return to the age of Armstrong. They removed themselves from fellowship and formed an offshoot. More like a hundred-and-some offshoots, but three or four main ones.

Each of these offshoots were in competition for new members as they left the parent organization for the dozens of newly-forming off-shoots, and for many, the medium for measuring the acceptability of this or that splinter group (as they came to be called) when considering membership became the group’s faithfulness to Armstrong’s teachings, which constituted true Christianity restored again. But slowly, inevitably, these groups began tinkering around the edges of Armstrong’s theology. This point was “clarified,” and that one “elucidated.” Nothing ever really changed — it was all euphemistically described to the followers, just as it had been in the original group after Armstrong’s death.

Press-2
David Pack

David Pack, though, founded a group called the Restored Church of God that built its whole membership on the solemn promise that nothing about HWA’s teachings would change. But reality tends to get in the way of such far-reaching promises, and one of the earliest dilemmas for the church was the appropriate use of the Internet in spreading Pack’s (and by extension, HWA’s) theological musings. After all, Mr. Armstrong didn’t use the Internet: he used radio and television. For the outsider, this seems like a simple issue: Herbert Armstrong didn’t use the Internet because it didn’t exist, and so it wasn’t any kind of doctrinal issue, just an administrative decision. Still, Pack took a whole sermon to explain to his small flock that, even though it looked like he was making a change, he wasn’t making a doctrinal change.

But further challenges waited.

As Pack was only ordained a pastor in Armstrong’s church before the breakup, and as he recognized only Armstrong as an authority, he had another problem: He wasn’t doing a pastor’s job. He was preaching the Armstrongite Gospel to the world, which Herbert Armstrong always taught is an apostle’s job. Armstrong was, in the eyes of his followers (which is really all that matters), an apostle on the same standing as the New Testament apostles, and for a pastor to step out of his assigned roll like that seemed mutinous. It was change. So in 2004, Pack declared himself an apostle as well. Problem solved.

But a door opened.

Once a leader who has sworn not to change a single teaching of his claimed predecessor, all doctrines become open for review. This is what happened in the Worldwide Church of God that ultimately led to its turn to orthodoxy and the thousands upon thousands of members who fled to other splinter groups to hold on to the faith once delivered. Pack would have to be very careful not to make changes that seem too drastic, too far-reaching. The solution: add doctrines. Don’t change any existing ones — just add. “These weren’t revealed to Herbert Armstrong because he didn’t need to know it, but now I can restore this truth.”

He has criticized other leaders for doing this, but it was of course inevitable that he do it himself. But how far could he go? He declared himself an apostle in 2004 shortly after declaring himself to be the prophesied “Watchman.” It’s been over ten years since he made a major change that he’s revealed to the public. In his most recent sermon, though, Pack makes the biggest and most dramatic change of his career, arguably of just about any of the splinter leaders.

In short, he makes the claim that if “you were called by God, and you are to participate in his work and walk in his ways, you have to turn over your assets to God’s church” and that “salvation is attached to [this new doctrine].” He calls this doctrine “Common,” and roots it in the observation that the New Testament church apparently shared a lot of things.”Not even Armstrong went that far,” a friend and fellow cult-watching enthusiast commented, and that’s about right: it is such a drastic change from Armstrong’s simple requirement of a 10% tithe on pre-tax income figures that it amounts a wholesale theological change. After all, how can you tithe 10% when you’ve already contributed all your assets?

This change reveals a megalomaniac mindset of literally historic proportions, a cult of personality that is simply dangerous.

Yet how could this happen? How could he go so much further than Herbert Armstrong ever dared, demanding more fiscally from his followers than Armstrong even dreamed of requiring? It is in part because I believe Armstrong was more mentally stable. Armstrong declared himself to be prophesied in the Bible, but he claimed no supernatural powers for himself. Pack has done just that.

Just what these extraordinary powers might be remains unanswered. But clearly there’s a disconnect between reality and how Pack sees reality. But when you see yourself literally in the Bible — well, when you see yourself in the Bible after using some horrible interpretative techniques — there’s almost no limit to what you can attribute to yourself. It’s not too hard to see how far reality has taken leave from Pack.

To suggest that because one Greek word appears to be pronounced like the man’s hometown — that shows just how little Pack understands basic exegetical concepts. But it gets worse:

Moses’s “strong hand” equals Armstrong? It would be laughable if it weren’t for the fact that so many people are allowing themselves to be duped with this nonsense.

One would think that after the long history of false predictions, both in the Armstrong community and in the general Christian prophecy-loving population, that a leader of a group in 2015 would have learned some lessons. If he hadn’t learned from others, one would think that Pack at least learned from himself. In 2004, for example, he stated the following, playfully edited:

It is now 2015, so apparently we did have ten years remaining until the end of the world as we know it, and I would wager that, come 2019, we still won’t have seen the end of the world. And yet, on and on he will go until the day that he dies continually proclaiming that “time is short,” just like Armstrong did.

G Has Left the Building

Saturday 12 July 2014

For just short of three years, I ran a web site that was highly popular with a very small demographic, writing about something that the vast majority of Americans and an even larger majority of potential international readers — we’re talking the 99.9999999% range — would have never even heard of. That topic was the various offshoots of a small Christian group, the Worldwide Church of God, with a peak membership of no more than 150,000, that imploded in the mid-1990’s when it changed all its distinctive, heterodox doctrines and began moving to mainstream, Evangelical Christianity. With that change, which the church leadership enacted in what many considered to be an underhanded, deceptive manner, the church membership dropped to roughly sixty thousand within a couple of years, then to thirty thousand in a few more years, as members sought newly-formed organizations that still clung to the Worldwide Church of God’s original teachings, left for mainstream Christian groups, or dropped out of religion altogether.

hwa
Herbert W. Armstrong

In the early years, there was a great deal of bickering and sniping among the splinter organizations about which group most faithfully adhered to the teachings of Herbert Armstrong, founder of the Worldwide Church of God. It provided fascinating, sometimes amusing reading, and having grown up in the organization and just dropped out of a philosophy of religion graduate program, I was hooked.

I started a web site, recruited fellow writers, developed a readership, and wrote almost daily about this or that church’s latest proclamation, declaration, or whine. As an atheist, I took a particularly smug tone, resorting often to heavy sarcasm and occasionally to outright mockery. Still, my pseudo-academic background led me to write several serious analyses of this or that organization’s claims and arguments, and I occasionally got comments about how the site helped this or that individual.

Then L was born, and I suddenly had no time. For some period before that my interest had been waning, but I hung on, convinced that what I was doing was somehow significant but doubting it was. Then, about eight months after L was born, after steadily decreasing posting, I called it quits with the following post.

I’ve been struggling–to find topics for this blog, to maintain my interest in all things Armstrong, to find time to care.

Truth be told, to care.

Jared said it best in a recent comment:

[A] moribund XCG is [not] entirely a bad thing either. After all, there’s only so much one can say about Armstrongism before you’ve said it all.

I don’t feel like I’ve said it all–there are thousands of words that could still be written about the phenomenon of Herbert Armstrong and the sect he formed. Yet, I really no longer have the interest or time to write anymore words about it.

I feel like Chicken Little, for our common XCG sky will continually fall. David Pack will talk about his web site statistics until the day he dies. Rod Meredith will provide critics with still more reasons to call him Spanky until the day he dies. Those in the upper echelons of the dwindling WCG will continue to talk about their amazing transformation until the day they die.

But I will not be commenting on them at that point, and I certainly won’t be commenting on them when I die.

About six months ago, I started preparing a final post, but I kept putting it off. I thought, “Maybe I’ll just write a little here, a little there,” for a while. Several have noticed and commented on this, and I have remained silent as to the cause of this dip in output.

My initial draft of this post might provide clarification:

Certain things in life force us to see things in a different perspective. Births, deaths, marriages, divorces, conversions–these are the kinds of things that make us stop and reflect on where we are, what we are, and most importantly, what we’re doing with the short time we have on Earth.

We have twenty-four hours in a day. We work at least eight of them; we sleep six to eight of them; we wash, shave, cook, eat, clean, drive, exercise and a million other forms of maintenance for another three or four a day. That leaves us with precious few hours a day for ourselves.

What do we do with that time?

Until recently, I spent time looking at, analyzing, and even mocking the beliefs and actions of a group of people I no longer have anything in common with.

Recent developments in my life now make that a less-than-ideal way to spend my free time.

The “certain event” I was referring to was the birth of my first child.

Since then, I’ve been of thinking about what I want my daughter to know about my own religious past. Truth is, I want her to know as little as possible. Because of shame? Embarrassment? Certainly not. I don’t want her to know for the simple reason that it no longer impacts my life. I can’t see much positive coming from me ever going into any detail with her about what I used to believe, about what her grandparents used to believe, about the fact that a true handful of people in the world still believe it. I don’t believe it, and that’s that.

And so, to quote one of my favorite authors:

“The time has come,” the Walrus said,
“To talk of many things:
Of shoes–and ships–and sealing-wax–
Of cabbages–and kings–
And why the sea is boiling hot–
And whether pigs have wings.”

To talk of many things–but not the XCG. And not here.

Some might be wondering whether this signals the end of my presence on the XCG scene. It does. In fact, I doubt very much that I will even “lurk.” As a famous, oft-misquoted teacher once said, “It is finished.”

I appreciate all the support I’ve received during this little two-and-a-half-year adventure. I thank all the fellow contributors who, throughout these last nearly thirty months, have helped to make the discussion here a little more balanced. I am grateful to all you regulars. You really kept the site going.

Most of all, I’m heartened by some of the comments of the past, folks telling me that I have helped them in some way. I appreciate you sharing those thoughts, for it gave me a certain joy that I will truly never forget.

But the time has come.

Best wishes to all, ill wishes to none, and I leave with the hope that if we ever meet again, we’ll have so much more to talk about than the XCG.

What had I accomplished?

I’d made several people mad: some sent me nasty emails or left malicious comments. Still, what could I expect? Wasn’t I doing the exact same thing with others’ beliefs? Some people threatened my web host with a lawsuit, but since the group in question was outside my scope of interest and never directly or indirectly mentioned on my web site, even a libel claim was ridiculous.

I’d inspired others to start their own web sites, and I’d provided apologists with plenty of material in turn for their own writing. What could I expect? With me criticizing them, they were right to criticize me, and since no leader or group was going officially to deal with a puny little hen like me, individual members took on the responsibility, inasmuch as the various churches officially allowed such activities.

But what about helping people? I’d always assumed that I must be doing that, that I must be helping others see the errors in logic that the various groups committed. Still, I only had a couple of emails. The comments to my farewell post provided a bit more information.

Comments

exrcg 08/22/2007 11:12 PM

thank you G — your site certainly helped me when i transitioned out of the cog world a couple years ago — it was a comment i made at that time, and i echo it again here. your efforts have been appreciated.

Jared Olar 08/22/2007 11:16 PM

I’ve been wondering when you were going to wrap it up here. Of course you told me before, after your daughter’s birth, that you were going to bow out soon. You hung on longer than I thought you were going to.

So long, and thanks for letting me have rather too much fun with Bob Thiel. Now go raise that little girl of yours and kiss [K]. Real Life is calling . . .

Lao Li 08/22/2007 11:41 PM

Thanks for all the work G.

The void between postings was a sign that time is short, we were in the gun lap!

Keeping something like this going can be the same as problems facing the COGs. Sometimes there’s some new input, but otherwise it’s just moving bones from one grave to another.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Church Corporate Critic 08/23/2007 12:12 AM

My thanks as well.

We wish you well.

You will be a much healthier person mentally.

Church Corporate Critic 08/23/2007 12:20 AM

I have a going away present:

gods

The peer review team liked it more than is customary for such articles.

It too may the last of its kind.

Robert 08/23/2007 01:19 AM

So, I’m going to take this opportunity to plug my own blog, and I hope you won’t mind. It’s a little different than XGC for a couple reasons: 1) It feature the stories of people who were in or around WCG and who now have given up faith entirely, and 2) I pretty much let them write it, so I have had no problem keeping it going since 1997– Wow, 10 years!

Non-Believer Former Members of the WCG
http://ironwolf.dangerousgames.com/exwcg/

Dennis 08/23/2007 09:21 AM

Excellent job G and yes, there is a time to move on as I know you have. The world will little note, nor long remember what you have done here…but I’m glad you’re in the neighborhood so we can have lunch and a good laugh from time to time!

And..for a limited time, if you act now, a free opportunity to finally be rubbed the right way by a former minister of WCG! Call now for a free assesment to see if you are sane enough to come to the office.
Best of all things to you and your family. I have a third little girl coming to the planet compliments of my son and daughther in law today, even as we speak.

charlie kieran 08/23/2007 10:30 AM

Best wishes G for you and your family. Congratulations on that little girl! This blog and a few others were a big help for me. My folks are still under the armstrongist thumb so I’ll continue to work on them in the meantime I just tell my kids not to pay any attention to what Pop-Pop says about God. For the most part I’ll be moving on as well although I’ll check in from time to time on Gavin’s site just to see what is going on. I just don’t have the time anymore and my fourth child is due in February.

Dennis: Congratulations on another grandchild and best wishes to your son and daughter in law.

It has been great reading posts from everyone!

Byker Bob 08/23/2007 11:23 AM

Well, G, we’re on the same page! I’ve recently found myself either satiated, or undergoing waning interest in all things ACOG, and have been visiting all the regular sites less and less over the past several months. That’s probably a good thing, because it indicates that everything is processed.

I really don’t know if there are any answers to all of the great philosophical and religious questions mankind has asked himself over the centuries. About all a person can do is to be kind to fellow man, and indulge in the pursuit of happiness.

Thank you for all of the thought provoking materials presented here, and the work that went into them. Best wishes for a good life for you and your family. It’s been fun being part of the xCG community and making some friends here.

BB

paul 08/23/2007 05:29 PM

My daughter was born this year, and between that and graduate school, time is short. I understand your position; it would be impossible for me to do what you have been doing. It’s been a good time!

But as far as the XCG’s and my daughter go, it is my duty to protect her from such garbage. I have to shield her from the apocolyptic-paranoid-fearful-slave mindset of the in-laws who are in the LCG. I don’t want my girl’s mind poisoned. I don’t even want her exposed to the XCG Lite mindset of my mother. I’m an atheist now, and I won’t hide it from my daughter…but then again I don’t mind if my wife wants to raise her as a Christian, so long as she hears both sides and gets to make up her own mind. But XCGdom? Forget it. I don’t want that filth near her. In this vein, I still have an interest in the XCG’s. Keep an eye on the enemy.

Paul

Gavin 08/24/2007 01:50 AM

Shucks G, what can I say? You’ve been a much appreciated kindred spirit, and flown the flag for the power of free-thinking in a community known for a lack of just that. I understand the need to let it go. Thanks for everything you’ve done: XCG has been an empowering venture with a distinctive voice of its own.

Kia kaha: strength to your arm

Gavin

Buffalo 08/24/2007 02:20 AM

:)

Anonymous 666 08/24/2007 09:47 AM

G,

How long do we have?

boston blackie 08/24/2007 11:20 AM

Or you could announce your retirement, pop back in from time to time as a guest blogger on Gavin’s other “Coast to Coast” site and then surprise us all with a new format — just like some folks we know. =)

“Wanna take a ride?”

Best wishes there G, whatever you choose to do!

b²

Mario 08/24/2007 01:31 PM

Thanks for being instrumental in our exodus from an (x)CoG G.

Congrats on your new arrival. Enjoy the moments, they go by so fast…

Peace to you and yours

John 08/24/2007 09:05 PM

Thanks so much G. Your site played a very important role in helping me exit the cult, and in convincing me that suicide was not the best path.

You and Gavin literally saved my life.

My best wishes to you and I hope life brings you many, many bountiful joys.

Frenchie 08/25/2007 09:22 AM

Congratulations on the birth of your first child … it is indeed a life-changing event.
You did say one thing that has total truth in it in your “good-bye” .

the fact that a true handful of people in the world still believe it

I know that you meant “just a few”
But it is the TRUE people of God who still believe and will continue to believe.

May you find your way.

Byker Bob 08/26/2007 01:50 PM

Oh, Man! What a cheap shot, Frenchie!

Actually, I hope that one day you and the rest of the deceived Armstrongites find your way!

BB

Lao Li 08/26/2007 10:18 PM

My last posting… promise…

The winding down of this site was noted with apparent glee by Dr T, who to me implied sic semper infidelis. Au contraire, I found this to be a very balanced and temperately moderated site. On other sites, the moderator beat me to a jellied pulp at the sniff of my appearing positive about anything that eminated from a COG. As I may have said already, this site is open, COG-related discussion; most of the “correction” I’ve received has been empirical rather than imperial.

FWIW, at my remote roost in Manchuria, I encountered students from a remnant Sabbatarian community. Their little congregation was perhaps the work of a (COGspeak) Sardis-era missionary, with whom their ancestors would have lost touch two or so revolutions ago. What a coincidence to be the first westerner ever encountered since then… Their first question was about the Sabbath being on Saturday, as in China the first day of the week is Monday…

Jared Olar 08/27/2007 10:27 PM

Yeah, I fliggered Bob Thiel would be sure to comment on G’s announcement. He says:

I thought that G was planning on phasing his anti-COG site out. I have long thought that those who are against the COGs would realize the truth, as in the last two sentences that he wrote above.

He means G’s comments, “Until recently, I spent time looking at, analyzing, and even mocking the beliefs and actions of a group of people I no longer have anything in common with. Recent developments in my life now make that a less-than-ideal way to spend my free time.”

But as usual Bob doesn’t see things correctly. If G were among “those who are against the COGs,” then he’d be motivated to continue this project. But he’s not “against the COGs.” He’s just in favor of things that are more important and necessary to life and happiness than the COGs have ever been or will ever be.

Then Bob says:

On the other hand, there are those of us who ARE COMMITTED to learning, growing in grace and knowledge, trying to get the good news of the Kingdom of God to the world, and wish to be part of the Church of God. So, the COGwriter site has no intentions of shutting down.

Oh goody. We were so worried that the Cooge Writer was going to shut down.

But since Bob is committed to learning, growing in grace and knowledge, trying to get the good news of the Kingdom of God to the world, and wishing to be part of the Church of God, that means there’s still hope that he’ll eventually see the light and leave the COOGEs behind.

Not that we’re holding our breath or anything . . . .

Lao Li 08/29/2007 06:32 AM

can’t resist… must respond…

Once during an episode of Batman, an Australian friend generalized that Americans overuse the prefix anti. Did you ever notice (like Seinfeld, perhaps) that Dr T usually puts in the anti when mentioning COG criticism or another COG that has a doctrine that doesn’t match with one of the LCG? Yet the comments appear fairly warming when it is noticed that some non-COG group has a doctrine that shows some similarity? The similarity should be no surprise, as it has been widely stated that HWA was revealled those doctrines when reading their literature… or the works of Allen, or Rupert, or Adolph…

Someone, somewhere posted that Bob’s site is not really different from this one; the difference is that when making comparisons, his metric is the LCG, and ours is reality.

Okay, resistance was futile. My last post, I promise…

See you next year in Beijing.

I’ll go help my Sardis students with their English…

Buffalo 08/29/2007 10:55 PM

G Scott wrote,

”[with]ill wishes to none”

Well, that’s great. What brought about the conversion?

Jared Olar 08/30/2007 10:06 AM

What brought about the conversion?

And what will bring about yours, Mr. Snark?

Buffalo 08/30/2007 04:08 PM

Ah, Mr Olar, by engaging in name-calling you prove my point while trying to make one of your own. Thanks. That means I need say no more.

Heather Ramsdell 08/30/2007 07:33 PM

Please get off MR. Pack’s back. Leave the Apostle alone.

Dr S 08/30/2007 08:26 PM

Please get off Mr. Pack’s back

Clever! Back. Pack.

Back! Back!

Do not attack the back of Pack!

I’ve heard that before. Do all you guys plagiarize?

Now to think up something to honor Olar the Scholar.

Jared Olar 08/31/2007 12:03 AM

Ah, Mr Olar, by engaging in name-calling you prove my point while trying to make one of your own.

My snarkily observing that your comment is snarky proves your allegation that G Scott has ill will toward . . . somebody? Oooookay.

Thanks. That means I need say no more.

Indeed, it doesn’t appear that you needed to say anything at all.

Byker Bob 08/31/2007 09:24 PM

I can’t believe that the zombies have finally gotten up the courage to attack just because G has stated that xCG has become a spent force.

What a bunch of tail gunners, just like their idol AMR.

BB

Stinger 08/31/2007 10:11 PM

It’s good to see you going out on top, G.

So don’t let the religious bastards and other assorted spiritual clowns & bible freaks get you down. You’ve done a great work in exposing Armstrongism and the stupid self-righteousness that it breeds in these Pharisee clones that have that big A stamped on their foreheads (and their own little black book tucked away somewhere).

Best2U,
— Stinger

Heather Ramsdell 09/01/2007 10:09 PM

“Don’t let the religious bastards and other assorted spiritual clowns & bible freaks get you down”.

Venom spued from a moron. Leave Mr. Pack alone. Idiots

Dr S 09/01/2007 10:45 PM

Ms Ramsdell

Remember the prime directive: avoid ad hominem arguments

We only comment on what is said. Take it as brutally frank feedback.

“Feedback is the breakfast of champions” — Denis Waitley

Besides, Mr Pack loves it! He believes it’s persecution, one of his proofs that he is on the right track! (From one of his World to Come “broadcasts”.)

Jared Olar 09/02/2007 09:26 AM

Heather, how do you know David Pack is “the Apostle”? Did he receive laying on of hands from Jesus? Did Jesus tell him, “Feed my sheep”? Has his shadow healed the lame or the sick? Has he raised the dead?

What is it exactly, apart from David Pack’s say-so, that makes him “the Apostle”?

Big Red 09/02/2007 04:28 PM

G is doing the right thing. Raising a child is the hardest, most rewarding job a person can know.

I want to address some comments to Frenchie, Buffalo, Heather, AMR and the like.

First, the comment about you being tail gunners is true. You hear the website is discontinued, so you want to toss in some venal cheap shots at the very last moment. Doesn’t sound very Christian to me.

I don’t have the same antagonism towards Armstrong as some do. My experience in the old WCG was generally positive. I know that some people did get burned, however. I saw it happen.

During a FOT, Mr Armstrong said “so many of you people don’t get it.” Then he added “a lot of you ministers don’t get it.” That comment hit my brain like a thunder bolt.

After that comment, I stopped kissing the minister’s foot. I stopped looking for assurance from other people.

So many people were burned by bad pastors. So many people were burned by the people around them. Like Jonathon Livinston Seagull, I became free of that stuff. Thank you Mr Armstrong!

Heather? You want to call people morons and idiots? Then you still don’t get it! You’re still “in the flesh.”

Where were you when God created the universe? Where were you when God created life on this earth? Can you set the sun or moon in its orbit?

Yet you feel free to pronounce judgements on people that you’ve never met? Whom are you to presume such things? You better look at your own life, and take care of your own sins.

And the same goes for Bob Thiel. He thinks highly of himself, but he’s going to face a big surprise.

Dr S 09/02/2007 09:13 PM

Well said, Big Red!

There’re so many splinters, with so much to hide —
When we assess, they return and deride.

With AMR and Heather, with us their beef
Is that we choose not to hail to their chief.

That said, Big Red,
it’s time to go to sleep…

The comments show the nature of the web site, indeed all sites: topic X soon morphs to topic Y in the comment section. One post, in fact, had well over a hundred comments that were mostly about something entirely different. Still, there they are, the comments that still bring a smile when I consider them:

  • your site certainly helped me when i transitioned out of the cog world a couple years ago
  • Thanks for being instrumental in our exodus from an (x)CoG G.
  • Thanks so much G. Your site played a very important role in helping me exit the cult, and in convincing me that suicide was not the best path.
    You and Gavin[, author of a similar site,] literally saved my life.

All those hours of work for three comments? To help three people? One could of course make the argument that only three people replied but that perhaps many more felt the same way.

Not Even With a Whimper

Saturday 21 May 2011

That’s great! It doesn’t start with an earthquake! And apparently for some, May is the cruelest month, breading disappointment out of dead prophecies, mixing frustration and desire. It’s supposed to be the end of the world as we know it, and no one left on Earth is supposed to feel fine. Yet with reports coming from Sumatra and New Zealand, where six o’clock has come and gone, show that today will pass just like any other.

Cult Watch has some good advice for Campings followers on this day of non-events. The first point is the hardest:

Be prepared to accept that you are wrong. Many others have claimed to know the end of the world before now, and obviously they were wrong. They too misinterpreted Scripture, so if the rapture does not occur on the 21st of May 2011 then you will have joined their ranks. This will be a blow to your ego and some will find this failure very emotional. The best course of action is to prepare to be humble. (Source)

It’s heady stuff, predicting the end of the world. When you’re a prophet that has figured out what no one else has figured out, it’s probably almost impossible not to get an inflated ego over it. Even if you’re not the prophet but someone supporting him (and of course it’s almost always a man), helping him, it’s easy to let all the esoterica to go to your head.

It’s not the first time people have lived through the end of the world, nor will it be the last. Religious huckster Herbert Armstrong predicted that the world would end in 1972. Almost forty years later and twenty-five years after his death, followers remain, still convinced that they know the signs of the times and will accurately see the end coming before anyone else.

One of Armstrong’s self-appointed successors is David Pack, who has his own church called The Restored Church of God. At the church’s magazine’s web site, there’s an article about the Camping prediction with the following lede: “Predictions from a small American religious sect have gained widespread attention.” Pack writes about all the reasons why Camping is wrong, and in the ultimate irony, ends the article, “If you are serious about learning the truth of the end time, read the most comprehensive book ever written on the subject” (source). Surprisingly, this book Pack mentions is the Bible, but he also suggests his The Bible’s Greatest Prophecies Unlocked! to reach full understanding of Scriptures.

It all brings to mind Eliot’s “The Hollow Men,” with it’s famous final stanza:

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.

Camping would probably be content with a whimper this beautiful Saturday.

Authorized Biographies

Saturday 14 November 2009

Press-2

If you’re the leader of a sect that believes in one-man (very much “man”), top-down leadership, how do you get your biography written?

Simple: you tell your staff to do it.

David C. Pack has held a variety of leadership roles throughout his dynamic, event-filled life: author of more than 20 books, scores of booklets and a vast array of articles–Pastor General of The Restored Church of God–voice of The World to Come program–founder of Ambassador Training Center–publisher/editor-in-chief of three magazines. The Authorized Biography of David C. Pack tells the life story of a man who was carefully prepared by God for a unique position. (RCG)

We can read the details of the life of David Pack, the Restored Church of God’s Pastor General, in painful detail: Volume One is a whopping 615 pages to cover 1948 through 1995! Volume Two is an additional 608 pages. It’s tempting to ask, “What did you leave out, Dave?”

He seems to have anticipated this:

Since an unusually wide range of experiences has enriched my life, a certain problem was created for the writers: which stories and encounters should be included in the biography. Of course, there were certain ones that had to be incorporated because of their transcending influence or impact on my life. The biography would fail in purpose if it did not contain them, coupled with an explanation of why they were important. This alone meant a lot of material needed to be included.

There was also a desire to relate stories that are of lesser importance, but that have had a role in shaping me nonetheless. It is not the biography’s purpose to make every one of these seem overly important or to present them as in every case having brought dramatic transformations in my thinking. Of course, some did. Both I and the many writers who participated struggled with how many, and which, stories to include, as well as when to cut off stories with the overall length of the biography in mind!

It was not the goal to bring in every story in my life, or every experience I have had. But, we believe that every one chosen adds to the overall picture of what shaped me, and it is my hope that the reader benefits and is left motivated, better informed and even inspired for having read them.

I can’t imagine pretending to be humble and appearing to all others to be exactly the opposite. Of course, if I thought I was, literally, the most significant person on the Earth, I might include the details about the time I sneezed and panicked at not having a tissue, or the time I thought I might ask a girl out but then wondered whether she would reject me.

False Start

Tuesday 6 May 2008

Perhaps trying to ride the coattails of Expelled, the Restored Church of God sect — one of many predicting the end of the world in “a few short years” — has begun publishing a series on evolution at its sister site, The Real Truth. In an article entitled “Evolution Exposed: Deconstructing False Science“, Bradford G. Schleifer attempts to explain all the rational faults in the theory of evolution, deconstructing it in one blow. Rather, a series of them, for this is only part one.

We might begin by asking about Schleifer’s scientific creditials, but that would probably be going against the spirit of the article:

Review the evidence with an open mind. Do not allow any existing bias to blind you to this crucial understanding. The implications are much greater than you probably realize.

An open mind means a couple of things. For some readers, it means that Schleifer wants us to set aside any prejudices we might have against creationism. But why should this be the case? I have a prejudice against voodoo, but I think Schleifer would agree with me on that one. I have a prejudice against phrenology. What do voodoo and phrenology have in common, with each other and creationism? They’re not science. But I doubt Schleifer — as most creationists — understands what that means.

“An open mind” also means an empty mind — empty of all understanding of evolution. That way, Schliefer can create an evolutionary straw man (most creationists already have one firmly in place for evolution) that he can then demolish.

Schliefer quickly shows his ignorance, asking “Why is evolution cemented in the minds of many as fact, when it is nothing more than theory?”

Apparently, Schliefer either had awful science teachers in high school or didn’t pay attention in science class. To begin an article asking why it’s called a theory is to expose a depth of ignorance that is simply stunning. Gravity exists, but there is such a thing as gravitational theory, but that doesn’t mean that gravity is not a fact. This is a favorite straw man of creationists, though: create a false dichotomy between “fact” and “theory.”

Schliefer continues in the same, uneducated manner:

Certain aspects of evolution may be confusing and difficult to understand. Do not be surprised! The rationale invented to support evolution is bewildering and complicated. It is tiresome and boring. Certain facts are conveniently left behind, and tedious scholarly language is used to stop most people from examining the subject in detail. Left frustrated, most assume evolution to be fact.

Each sentence in this short passage is loaded beyond belief. What’s he really saying?

  • Certain aspects of evolution may be confusing and difficult to understand.
    “I’m assuming you’re a complete idiot and can’t understand ‘complicated’ things. Don’t worry — I’ll explain them all.”
  • The rationale invented to support evolution is bewildering and complicated.
    “Your small mind might be unable to understand these deep, convoluted secrets, but don’t worry — it doesn’t mean you’re stupid. It just means you’re stupid.”
  • It is tiresome and boring.
    “I slept through biology.”
  • Certain facts are conveniently left behind, and tedious scholarly language is used to stop most people from examining the subject in detail.
    “When I flipped through a few issues of Scientific American as part of the ‘research’ I did on this article, I didn’t understand much of what I read. Therefore, the authors must be conspiring to deceive me.”
  • Left frustrated, most assume evolution to be fact.
    “Unless you haven’t taken my advice — you haven’t approached the subject with an openness to be wrong — and you’ve been convinced for any period of time about creationism; then you’ll just assume evolution is wrong.”

Treating the reader with condescension is not the rhetorical technique I’ve ever seen, and usually, it makes it difficult to continue reading. However, I read this and I’m hooked, just like the old SNL skit where everyone’s tasting the rancid milk and rubbing Chris Farley’s sweaty belly: just how bad can this get?

Schliefer increases the level of dolt rhetoric in the very next passage:

This series will demystify the subject. You will know if evolution is science fact or science fiction. Convoluted and illogical theories will be simplified in a way never before presented. While some sections are technical, the more detail given, the better you will be able to see through the theory’s “smoke and mirrors.” Clear and simple logic always destroys ill-conceived suppositions.

“Smoke and mirrors” — I’m immediately wondering if they’re going to be dealing with anything of any substance. For example, will he mention chromosomal fusion? Will he deal with comparative biology and embryology and how they provide evidence for evolution?

The old fact/theory “proof” is not the only worn out argument that Schliefer uses. He goes for the obvious: the Law of Entropy disproves evolution argument:

Linking cause and effect with another set of scientific laws–thermodynamics–makes the picture sharper. The word “thermodynamics” comes from the Greek words therme, meaning “heat or energy,” and dunamis, meaning “power.”

What the Greek roots have to do with anything is anyone’s guess. Could it be an attempt to seem erudite? Nah — that’s too blazingly obvious.

The entropy argument goes like this: all things are in a state of decay, based on the law of entropy. Therefore, if life had been evolving for billions of years, eventually entropy would have taken over and wound down everything that evolution wound up.

But it’s not so simple:

it is only the over-all entropy of a complete, or closed system that must increase when spontaneous change occurs. In the case of spontaneously interacting sub-systems of a closed system, some may gain entropy, while others may lose entropy. For example, it is a fundamental axiom of thermodynamics that when heat flows from subsystem A to subsystem B, the entropy of A decreases and the entropy of B increases. The statement that an increase in order can only occur as the result of a directional mechanism, program, or code is misleading. Any process that can be demonstrated to take place with an increase in order/decrease in entropy is arbitrarily deemed to be the consequence of an undefined “directional mechanism.” (TalkOrigins.org)

But that’s science. Schliefer is only interested in science insofar as it seems to back up creationism, such as a non-creationist expressing doubts about evolution, which proves that even the scientists themselves don’t believe it but go on with the great conspiracy of evolution.

I can’t wait to see what “Part 2” includes.

Evolution Exposed: Deconstructing False Science–Part 1

What Jesus Wouldn’t Have Done

Sunday 25 March 2007

One of my favorite little sects out there is the Restored Church of God. It’s leader, David Pack is The spokesman for god — by his own humble admission, an apostle, with the same authority as the Apostle Paul. Yes, that Paul, of New Testament fame.

After Katrina hit the Gulf coast, he, like many other ministers, gave a sermon about what True Christians© should do to help.

True Christians© should, in short, continue preaching the gospel and warning the people — synonymous in his group. The gospel — the True Gospel© — is simply that Germany is going to rise again and this time beat America, take it into captivity, and basically make the Nazis look like daycare playmates.

(Confused? It all goes back to ancient simmering hatreds. America, of course, comprises the real Israelites, along with the French, the Dutch, the British — the Lost Ten Tribes. Germany is Assyria. History — ancient or otherwise — is not a strength of this group’s theology. )

False Christians (the vast majority of the 2 billion Christians in the world world, who are deceived and actually worship Satan) give to relief organizations. True Christians© (David Pack’s group — representing at most 0.00005% of the world Christian population) don’t.

His reasoning, though, is stunning biblical hermeneutics. I clipped the relevant portion from the sermon.

The End of [Herbert Armstrong’s] World

Sunday 16 January 2005

The end of the world came for Herbert Armstrong nineteen years ago today.

He’d been predicting the end of the world for some time, starting back in the thirties. World War Two, he declared, would end with “the Second Coming of Christ!” It ended with the Iron Curtain, but never mind.

He then updated his prediction: 1975. He even wrote a “book,” for lack of a better term, called 1975 in Prophecy. Once again, Jesus was late for his own party.

Armstrong, founder of the now-evangelical, then-cultic Worldwide Church of God, had a fondness for the number nineteen. It was somehow of some Biblical significance. “Nineteen-year time cycles” and such. So here it is, nineteen years after the end of his world, and we’re still bumbling along.

The fact that Armstrong never got it right, and in fact failed in two predictions of Jesus’ return (not to mention a host of other failed predictions), hasn’t killed the hydra of Armstrongism. There are still true believers out there, waiting eagerly for the end of the world that’s supposed to come any day now. Men like Roderick Meredith, Gerald Flurry, and David Pack make the most of them, convincing their followers (“sheep,” as they like to call them) to donate thousands of dollars to their sects in return for a guarantee of personal safety when “the Tribulation” begins in “five to fifteen years.”

The Philadelphia Church of God published a year ago its own thoughts about the legacy of Herbert Armstrong.

It’s been “five to fifteen years” for forty years. Armstrong’s been dead an entire “19-year time cycle.” But cultic thinking and the need for security create a seeming perpetual motion machine out of Herbert Armstrong’s teachings. The world is a better place without Armstrong, but his ignorance continue to haunt.

The question of just who Armstrong was used to haunt me a great deal. The question of identity was the question of sincerity. In other words, did he really believe his own heresy? In still other words, was he consciously fleecing his believers? This simple question — was he a True Believer — affects all other aspects of how we view him. It’s makes it a question of either being an uneducated but sincere man who got caught up in his own growing power and wealth, or being callously manipulative and evil.

Everyone who’s ever been affected by Armstrong and come to reject his heresy has to answer that question. I’m not sure I’ve worked out my own answer. I probably never will. Unfortunately, I’ll probably never stop trying to work it out — the obsession factor.

The legacy, if it can even be called that, of Armstrong is dying outside the circles of people who were directly affected by his heresy. Before he died, Armstrong managed to visit with all sorts of kings and dignitaries. Supporters say it’s because he was such a great, noble man; critics charge that he bought these audiences.

At his death, letters of condolence from leaders around the world:

Teddy Kollek, mayor of Jerusalem at the time, wrote, “One could only be deeply impressed by his vast efforts to promote understanding and peace among peoples. His good deeds were felt in many corners of the world.” The mayor of Pasadena called him “a giant of a man.” The Israeli ambassador to the U.S. called him “an inspiring religious and public and educational personality.” The king of Thailand considered him a “close and valuable friend.” The king of Nepal said he was “dedicated to the cause of serving humanity.” (Philadelphia Trumpet)

“He was a great man,” everyone in his church thought when he died, “And the whole world shares in our grief.” The letters from leaders (even Reagan sent a letter) were proof of Armstrong’s worldwide impact. They knew him; they met with him; they sought his advice — the world reeled from the loss.

And now? How many know of him? If I were to stand at a street corner and take a poll in downtown Manhattan, who would know whom I’m talking about?

Virtually none, I would imagine.

The day before

Friday 14 January 2005

The trouble with the day before is that no one knows he’s experiencing a “day before” until it becomes the day after.

Nineteen years ago it was a “day before” for about 100,000 people.

It was the day before the end of one man’s world.

Tomorrow, life starts again for thousands, but they don’t know it. Tomorrow, everything changes for the select few, but no one knows it. The changes are so sudden that it’s only in sum that they make any sense, make any difference.

No Letter

Wednesday 20 March 2002

This content is private.

XCG Silliness

Tuesday 19 March 2002

I was reading through some of the UCG materials I grabbed off the web and I came upon a few quotes last night that deserve comment. These all come from a sermon by Les McCullough given on 12 August 2000. The title of the sermon is “Prophecy” — certainly not an uncommon title among the various churches of God.

It may not be exactly as we thought in times past, we’ve talked, someone was saying the other day, I won’t mention names, that they haven’t worried about the beast since Franz Joseph Straus died because some proclaimed very loudly that he was to be the beast. And, of course, I have kidded with people, I had the opportunity to have breakfast with the beast. He never became the beast, but we did have the opportunity of having him visit the campus in Big Sandy and spending time with him and so on. Very interesting man to talk with, but he wasn’t the one. We’ve had various scenarios that we’ve established. It’s not to say that it’s not going to happen, but it may not always happen exactly the way we thought it would.

The most interesting part of that quote comes at the end: “We’ve had various scenarios that we’ve established. It’s not to say that it’s not going to happen, but it may not always happen exactly the way we thought it would.” The question becomes, “At which point do you abandon some particular idea as simply one of the various COG “scenarios” and not infallible Biblical interpretation?” 1975 came and went without a hiccup; HWA died and didn’t rise to meet Christ descending; the WCG, as HWA left it, is no more. When will these people ever say, “Perhaps it’s all just one of our ‘scenario?’” Naturally the answer to that question is “Never.” That would constitute a lack of faith.

Later in the sermon he again dances around the fact that the COG prophecies have been wrong for so long that it should be cause to start doubting them:

We could say, well, we were all wrong and take a look at that over there, and here’s what this was talking about and so on, but the fact is that there is still coming a major force in Europe that is going to become a or the major power in the world, and there is going to be a great price paid.

Once again — “Well, it didn’t happen when we said it would happen, but mark our words: it will happen!” Armstrong himself said something fairly similar. Of course his explanation also included the well-worn notion that “God has given us a little more time.”

So a time of reckoning is drawing near. It’s not going to happen tomorrow, not next year, but progressively it’s going to be coming about. Where are we now? Wouldn’t you like to know? How much time do we have left? When are these things going to come about? God doesn’t give us that knowledge. He says it’s going to happen.

How long are they going to be able to say, “It’s not going to happen tomorrow, not next year?” That’s the amazing thing about Armstrongism, for the answer is almost certainly, “Forever.” Armstrong did it — he created the perpetual motion machine. These people will pass the religion on down to their kids, who in turn will pass it to their kids — always saying, “A time a reckoning is drawing near!”

Concerning Biblical interpretation he says:

Are they really going to come back on white horses? I don’t know that Christ is necessarily obligated to have all the scores that are going to be coming with him strictly on white horses. It’s talking about, it’s symbolic, it’s talking about righteousness, it’s talking about them coming in righteousness. Maybe they’ll come on white horses. We will have to wait and see, but, basically the idea is it’s talking about the purity, it’s talking about the righteousness, it’s talking about the glory of God and coming back in that way. He’s going to come back and establish his rule upon this earth and become the King of all the earth, the King of all the kings of the earth.

Wait a minute! It says right there, in so many words, that there’ll be coming on white horses. Since when does a COG begin using the word “symbolic” regarding Biblical interpretation? That is almost startling. He probably doesn’t even get the implications of what he said.

Lastly, there’s this gem, with which he concludes the sermon:

It’s good to hear the warning. We haven’t done as much about talking about a warning as we did at one time, but the fact is that there is a time coming when this nation is going to be crushed. I don’t like to think about that. You sing “America the Beautiful,” and then you hear these other things, and you really don’t like to think of this great land of ours being destroyed, and crushed, and others coming in and taking over, and the other lands of the world as well. It’s going to happen, we need to be telling people. It’s our job as the people of God to be carrying something of a witness to the rest of the people of the earth, telling them there is a time coming, and you can escape it. You can repent, you can change, and you can be spared and have the opportunity to stand in the Kingdom of God as sons and priests, to teach the rest of the world the way of peace for the very first time.

There it is — all of Armstrongism in a single paragraph. HWA began preaching that nonsense back in the thirties, and now, almost seventy years later people are still believing it, still accepting that theory despite all the evidence against it. It’s just amazing.

More XCG Thoughts

Wednesday 13 March 2002

Yesterday was a busy day. At least several things of significance happened. About the LCG message board, I wrote, “I wonder if I’ll get kicked off at some point. I’m sure it’s monitored. I’ll bet Meredith even gets reports about it on some regular basis.” Well, I was close. I didn’t get kicked off in the sense than I as expecting (i.e., account deactivated) but much more thoroughly: my ISP address has been blocked. Not difficult to do since I’m fairly sure I’m the only one accessing the site through Telekomunikacja Polska. I got email notification regarding it, to which of course I have several objections and will address in a reply to be sent today.

What I’m most curious about is whether they’re trying to figure out who I am. It shouldn’t be too hard since they have a few distinguishing facts:

  1. They have my ISP address, which is certainly very unique.
  2. They have my fake email address, which I used in contacting Mr. Kobernat.
  3. They know my father is still an LCE in the WCG.

All they have to do is send a message to all ministers with those facts, and Mr. Kobernat will readily be able to tell them who this joker is. I wonder if it’s gone that far already. And it’s likely they will (or have) do (done) it, for the message I received was CC’ed to Gerald Weston. I remember him from his time in Asheville, and I remember him as being incredibly controlling and something of an asshole.

It makes me laugh to think of the little mystery I’m embroiled in. Or rather, I’m at the heart of.

So I’ve written a letter which I will email today:

Mr. Brian Scarborough,

I appreciate the fact that you took the time to send me a detailed letter explaining your decision. After checking my email and reading your message, I went to the message board out of curiosity to see if you had made mention of my being banned or not. Obviously I was unable to take a look since you’ve banned my IP address. Taking no chances, I see. (As an aside, a simple, “Please don’t post” would have done the trick.)

I apologize for things admittedly getting out of hand. I knew they were, and I was trying to reign things in a little. Too little too late.

However, I would respond to a few of the things you wrote.

To begin with, “You stated on your “Who I am. . .” post that you are interested in who went where and why. I would like to point out to you that many if not most of out teens on the forum were quite young when the split took place, so your desire to collect information on this subject would not be best served on the teen forum.”

I listed that interest as one of the several, as you yourself acknowledged. Furthermore, it’s clear that many of them are old enough to have remembered what happened quite clearly, as they themselves said. Lastly, as you said in one of your own posts, the message board is not solely for “young people.”

“You also stated that you wanted to ‘have meaningful communication with those who are still in the COG’s’. As you can see from the differences in what you believe and what LCG believes, meaningful communication does not seem possible.”

It depends on what “meaningful” means. Still, I guess we’ll never know. I also wrote, “The nonsense I’ve written about interpretation and the existence of God is really of no importance to me. I didn’t begin posting here because I wanted to pick theological fights, and in fact I sort of regret beginning those communications because it has probably biased a few people against me. And such discussions generally accomplish nothing.” The implication I was making, though obviously not strong enough (and clearly it should have been an explication, not an implication), was that I’m not really interested in pursing any those discussions. I even called my own writing “nonsense.” What I should have done is add, “As such, I will not respond to any of those posts unless you actually want to know my point of view on them,” or something along those lines.

“Is it your desire to change the beliefs of our teens?”

Most certainly not. I detest when someone approaches me and says, “Do you know Jesus?” and I wouldn’t do that to someone else. I didn’t initiate the discussion about the existence of God; I was responding to someone’s question. Go back and look at my posts: I never initiated any discussions that could be characterized as inflammatory. yes, I did contribute to them and help them become “inflammatory,” but I didn’t begin a post, “Why on earth does anyone believe in God?!?”

Furthermore, one thing I meant by saying, “And such discussions generally accomplish nothing,” is simply that there would probably be no way I could change anyone’s mind even if I wanted to. I am not Dan Baker, out to convert everyone to “free thinkers.” I was merely expressing my views, and then responding to their responses. I’ve thought about my position for a long time; many of the things they brought up were things I wrestled with on my own. I simply reached a different conclusion than they have.

“Have any of the post made by the teens changed your mind about the existence of God?”

Actually, in a way, yes. I was impressed with some of the articulations and a couple of posts did hit right at one of the weaknesses of an non-theistic stance. As I tried to make clear in one particular post, I don’t have a strong belief that God doesn’t exist; I have no positive belief that God exists. The argument from design (which is basically what all the posts concerned, and that’s why it degenerated into a discussion of evolution) is compelling to me in a strange way, and I readily admit (though perhaps a little too late) that it does make me think that there very well could have been (perhaps I’ll go so far as to say probably was?) some force controlling evolutionary development. A far cry from the nature of God as defined in the LCG’s statement of beliefs, I’m sure, but certainly Madeline O’Hare either.

“I can’t see where this dialogue will help either party.”

Apologetics is not a useful thing? That’s basically what everyone was engaged in. I pointed out weaknesses of arguments; they responded; I pointed out further weaknesses; they responded further. A debate, in other words. And except for one person who seemed to take the notion of evolution very personally, most of them who were participating seemed eager to do so. It was polite; it didn’t (generally) dissolve into personal attacks (and the two times it did, it was fairly moderate, consisting of simply ad hominim arguments, which I calmly explained); it was calm; and it was well-thought out in many instances.

None of my questions were merely exercises in being disagreeable. I also not suggesting that I was “just trying to make sure they were on their toes!” They were genuine inquiries. My statements were not meant as personal assaults, but as presentations of my views.

Re: “to put it bluntly, I think they/you are all wrong”

I fail to see how that’s problematic. I didn’t say, “I think you’re idiots for believing that.” I didn’t say, “I think you’re heads aren’t screwed on tight.” I didn’t use profanity. I was stating, clearly, my position. I wanted no confusion. Perhaps it is a little too strong. I was judging it on my own standard, I guess, and for someone to tell me, “Frankly, I think you’re wrong” bothers me about as much as someone saying, “That’s a nice car.” Ambiguity leads only to problems. I wanted to be clear. That’s all. Clearly, though, I should have put more thought into it.

“I hope that you will not take this decision the wrong way.”

I’m not sure what the right way would be. You simply don’t want me to post, and I certainly understand why. I don’t take that personally, though it is a shame.

In closing, I would like you to reconsider your decision. I am willing to forego any discussions of any topics you deem inappropriate; I am willing to submit any posts to you for pre-approval. If my restriction is the result of requests by users, I understand and comply willingly to the wishes of the majority. If however it was only an administrative decision, I humbly request you to reconsider.

If you are unwilling to allow me to post, please allow me at least to view the message boards. I give you my word that if you ask me to, I will not make a single post, nor will I initiate contact with anyone via email.

In closing, I readily admit things were out of hand; I readily admit that I might have offended some; and I completely understand your position and do not take your actions personally in anyway whatsoever. I would, however, like to ask forgiveness and request a second chance.

I’ve decided to see what a “humble and contrite” spirit will do for me. And I am genuinely saddened that I got kicked off. However, if I’m not allowed back on, it won’t be the end of the world for me. (I’m sure he’ll think, “Man, this guy can’t write a short email to save his life.”)

Interestingly I got email from “Bedbug,” whose real name is Josh, the individual on the board who’d started posting about medical marijuana. He said he’d gotten kicked off several times himself, and that the administrator kicks of anyone who has an opinion. I laughed out loud at that one.

The big event of the day, though, came while playing volleyball with the teachers. I was so frustrated playing with Sojka. During the whole evening he never set me. Always Jacek. It really pissed me off. Next time I will surely say something about it.

Still, that frustration was not the “big event.” As we were playing, who should walk into the gym but Anna Pardynek!!!! I was so thrilled. At first I just waved at her, and then I thought, “I’ve been wanting to see her for ages. Now I finally do and I don’t got and talk to her!? Am I crazy? ‘What will the teachers think?’ Who gives a fuck!” So I ran over and chatted with her. The others on my team (Jola, Sojka, and Jacek) were waiting for me, and I just waved them off with a smile and said, “Grajcie! Grajcie!”

I can’t recall that we really talked about anything of any import. The thrilling thing for me was just getting to see her finally. I regret not being more aggressive, though. I said, “Maybe we’ll meet each other at some point,” when I should have said, “No, I’m not happy with that. I want to plan to meet you,” using the “wy” to keep her boyfriend, who was standing right there, happy. Oh, she mentioned that her boyfriend had also wanted to kill that idiot of hers that all but attacked me in the disco. Perhaps this fellow is a little more mellow and secure with himself.

She was, in some ways, a sad sight, though. Her teeth are absolutely atrocious. It’s pitiful. And she reeked of cigarettes. Lastly, I think she might be pregnant, though I’m not entirely sure. She didn’t say anything about it, and I’m certainly not going to ask. Still, she looked a little plump in all the right places.

So I’ve finally got to see Ann P. I should write Ann P. in Boston to tell her about it . . . and I should have mentioned Ann Petrone to Anna.

Lastly, I wrote a first draft of a letter to Mr. Kobernat. And I was able to get to sleep last night — even make it through most of the day yesterday — without thinking about that nonsense. After all, it’s not the end of the world.

I finished with Sabina’s próbna matura yesterday. She got “dostateczyny,” though just barely (by something like a point and a half). I told her and she was pleasantly surprised. Her biggest problem was the listening, I think. She got all but one wrong in one of the two listening sections.

XCG Thoughts

Tuesday 12 March 2002

I am not sure whether I’m being completely naïve in saying that a COG member and a non-COG member (and I’m counting the WCG among them) can actually be friends? I’ve been thinking about that since I received an email from Mr. Kobernat yesterday. More on that in moment. For now —

The COGs define reality in a certain way. They say that Germany is going to rise again; they say that they are going to be God as God is God; they say Christians are required to keep the Sabbath. All these things, while not necessarily originally, are in an original combination. Original packaging, you might say. It places them in the cognitive minority, as I’ve stated so many times in this damn journal. One of the things their worldview has to do is to account for that very fact — if this is the “Bible interpreting the Bible” and it’s all so clear to them, why isn’t it clear to everyone? Why can’t they go to their neighbor, explain the doctrines, show the scriptural backing, and then watch as the neighbor, now fully convinced, picks up the phone to call the local COG minister? That’s something the worldview must explain. “God’s calling” and “worldwide deception” are two ways of doing it — or rather, two sides of the same method. So their unique packaging requires a unique grouping. Yet another way to reach the necessity for plausibility.

My naivety further comes from the thought of my parents and the Kobernats now trying to get together. Imagine the K’s head up north for whatever reason, and as a gesture of good will invite my parents out to dinner. What are they going to talk about now? If they talk theology, it will descend into argument. If they talk about church life, that will certainly lead to a discussion of theology. In my open letter I wrote that the only thing that we shared in common was an assumed mutual belief. Now that I think about it, I’m not sure that anyone ever pretended anything else. It’s not that the Kobernats sought out new friends coming into the Kingsport area and my parents are the ones they happened to find. They were moved there by the organization that defined this unique package of beliefs, which in turn necessitated the creation of a sort of mini-ghetto.

In other words, the WCG brought them together, so that was the first and strongest aspect of their friendship. Now that that’s gone, what the hell would they have to talk about? Grandchildren? My parents, much to Mom’s dismay I’m sure, are not grandparents — a no-go there. World events? Mr. Kobernat sees these world events as fulfillments of prophecy, while Dad doesn’t (I’m assuming). Sports? Dad doesn’t care much for sports, and I don’t think Mr. K. does in and of themselves either. What does that leave them to talk about.

Now, about Mr. K’s response:

Hi Gary, I did respond. To your hotmail address. Didn’t you receive it? It didn’t come back to me making me think it went through. Which address do you like best. I will respond to your answers to my questions as soon as we are sure we are connected.

My first reaction was, “Oh shit — what have I done?!?” I thought I’d jumped to conclusions that were certainly unwarranted. But further thought has made me realize a few things, things which I would like to clear up with him as well.

To begin with, I’m worried that I now appear to be somewhat quick to judge, as if I fired this letter off as a result of one unanswered email. If that were the case, then I certainly would be justly labeled a hot-head. However, this is not an isolated incident. I’ve sent many emails that have gone unheeded, and as my journal shows, it dates back to at least October 1999. That’s almost two and a half years ago. Further, Mr. Kobernat was not the only one not to respond. I sent Brett several emails at one point (though I can’t provide documentation regarding the specific date) and never got so much as a “Howdy” in return. I’d mentioned this to my folks, and they said that they’d had messages go unreturned. Add to this the fact that they went to the Kingsport area several times without even calling my parents.

It seems to me that the chances of all those emails not making it through, and of not a single response back not making it through are slim indeed. Lost email is the exception, not the rule, so even if two or three did get lost, certainly he would have received a few. And of those few, if he’d responded, certainly one or two would have fallen through.

He doesn’t seem like the type of person to lie — I know him well enough to know that he is sincere in his beliefs and wouldn’t consciously go against them. Yet I find it hard to explain his lack of contact any other way than by saying that he simply didn’t respond.

I guess I’ll just have to write some kind of careful reply saying all this. I do, however, stand by the contents of most of the letter. Even if it’s not true in this particular case, it is true in a number of cases. Though as I’ve pointed out, that seems to me now to be somewhat inevitable.

Despite all this — damn, I feel stupid. I emailed my folks asking them what to do. I chatted with Chhavi (via MSN) asking her what to do. And I even talked to Mamo about it. “You didn’t kill anyone,” was her response, “So it can’t be that bad.”

XCG Discovery

Thursday 7 March 2002

I found tonight the most interesting thing: a message board for young people from the Living Church of God. And I was able easily enough to get a membership and begin posting! Surprisingly easy access for something linked to a church of God. With its closed-door policy, the LCG has left a big open door on the internet.

I was thinking about this, though, and it’s certainly a different experience being in a CoG today as compared to when I was attending in Kingsport. “Dissident literature” was some vague, nebulous bunch of booklets and pamphlets floating around out there, as difficult to get as narcotics. Just as you can’t walk up to anyone on the street and try to buy pot, you couldn’t walk up to any church member and say, “Hey, have you got any Dissident Literature?” I remember thinking I’d found some downstairs in Dad’s library one time — it was almost like finding the ark. “It does exist after all!” was almost what I was thinking. But now, one only has to log on and in a matter of minutes you can find all the “dissident literature” you want.

I wonder if I’ll get kicked off at some point. I’m sure it’s monitored. I’ll bet Meredith even gets reports about it on some regular basis.