It is quite interesting to read the article about the Restored Church of God, led by David Pack on Wikipedia. In fact, if you haven't looked at it, you should do so too. You can read it right here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restored_Church_of_God.
Showing posts with label David Pack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label David Pack. Show all posts
Monday, October 21, 2019
Friday, November 18, 2011
Article Worth Reading About David C Pack
Regular readers will already know about the blogroll I have running in the left hand side menu, but I surely want to recommend you read the article about David C Pack which can be found right here: http://otagosh.blogspot.com/2011/11/packs-pipedream.html. It is well worth reading, and I fully agree with the author behind Otagosh.
Have a nice weekend everyone. :-)
Have a nice weekend everyone. :-)
Friday, March 25, 2011
The "Restored" Perspective on Criticism
For those interested in seeing the Restored COG perspective on criticism, they can read the november/december article that appeared in Pillar "Are YOU a Critic?". In that article James Turck talks of criticism as though it was by definition something negative - of the devil.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Anyone that has studied a bit about personal development and good business ethics knows that there is a HUGE difference between negative criticism and CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.
When criticism is constructive it is possible to get ahead of competitors who might not be as focused on their own work methods. In other words: it's not only a question of working harder to get ahead. Sometimes working smarter works much better.
That is worth remembering when ministers try to garner lots of scriptures into trying to say something false. That is, as you regular readers know, one of the main methods used by ministers of Armstrongism.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Anyone that has studied a bit about personal development and good business ethics knows that there is a HUGE difference between negative criticism and CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.
When criticism is constructive it is possible to get ahead of competitors who might not be as focused on their own work methods. In other words: it's not only a question of working harder to get ahead. Sometimes working smarter works much better.
That is worth remembering when ministers try to garner lots of scriptures into trying to say something false. That is, as you regular readers know, one of the main methods used by ministers of Armstrongism.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Surviving Armstrongism
Surviving Armstrongism takes time - for some a short time, for others a long time. Needless to say, lots of friendships may be broken when you leave Armstrongism, but you need to count the cost.
The psychological impact of Armstrongism is very big in the sense of people consecrating their entire lives (both timewise and moneywise) to "preaching their gospel" - but always to a limit. In numerous offshoots there is a clear distinction between ministry and lay-members. People are asked, before joining, to "prove all things", using 1. Thess 5:21. What they forget to mention is the rest of that verse.
In other words, discard all that is NOT good.
When people have then joined the "faithful flock" the attitude is "pay & pray" - leaving out the final "and by the way, shut up if and when you disagree."
Disagreement after you have joined the faithful flock is considered rebellion, instead of realizing that there might be something that was overlooked by the all-knowing and inspired ministry.
That is the very reason why some ministers still speak out against the internet. The information available contradicts THEIR claims, and therefore the easiest way to contradict what is being said is to write articles about how evil the internet is. Such has been the exhortation of both Gerald Flurry and David C Pack - one saying it in the Philadelphia Trumpet a few years ago, and the other writing it in one of his booklets.
The difficult way for such a minister would be to ANSWER the claims made. History proves them wrong, and their actions prove themselves wrong, so they need the easy strategy.
In fact, it's Mind Control 101.
Once you have people obeying the way the tail moves, you are losing faithfulness to Scripture because then man begins to follow MINISTRY over SCRIPTURE. That is a very dangerous path.
Dangerous because everyone knows the very ministry that speaks out against the internet have websites with THEIR version to attract even more people through this media...
But the best news ever is that you can truly see through these arguments once you have survived Armstrongism. That is the reason why this blog, and numerous others, will be kept alive with even more information to help those willing to open their eyes and ears. People caught up in Armstrongism NEED this type of information to help them in their process of surviving Armstrongism.
The psychological impact of Armstrongism is very big in the sense of people consecrating their entire lives (both timewise and moneywise) to "preaching their gospel" - but always to a limit. In numerous offshoots there is a clear distinction between ministry and lay-members. People are asked, before joining, to "prove all things", using 1. Thess 5:21. What they forget to mention is the rest of that verse.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."
In other words, discard all that is NOT good.
When people have then joined the "faithful flock" the attitude is "pay & pray" - leaving out the final "and by the way, shut up if and when you disagree."
Disagreement after you have joined the faithful flock is considered rebellion, instead of realizing that there might be something that was overlooked by the all-knowing and inspired ministry.
That is the very reason why some ministers still speak out against the internet. The information available contradicts THEIR claims, and therefore the easiest way to contradict what is being said is to write articles about how evil the internet is. Such has been the exhortation of both Gerald Flurry and David C Pack - one saying it in the Philadelphia Trumpet a few years ago, and the other writing it in one of his booklets.
The difficult way for such a minister would be to ANSWER the claims made. History proves them wrong, and their actions prove themselves wrong, so they need the easy strategy.
In fact, it's Mind Control 101.
Once you have people obeying the way the tail moves, you are losing faithfulness to Scripture because then man begins to follow MINISTRY over SCRIPTURE. That is a very dangerous path.
Dangerous because everyone knows the very ministry that speaks out against the internet have websites with THEIR version to attract even more people through this media...
But the best news ever is that you can truly see through these arguments once you have survived Armstrongism. That is the reason why this blog, and numerous others, will be kept alive with even more information to help those willing to open their eyes and ears. People caught up in Armstrongism NEED this type of information to help them in their process of surviving Armstrongism.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
David C Pack - Few Followers Indeed
It is somewhat ironic to watch David C Pack on Twitter. This minister believes himself to be a godsend to mankind, yet only 73 people are willing to read his tweets. People who have read this blog regularly will no doubt have checked up on his attitude towards the internet.
He deeply hates freedom of speech - especially when anyone dares challenge his veteran opinions. It is highly offensive, according to "Should Accusers Be Answered", that anyone would question him. He really feels inspired to a level that anything which contradicts him must be rebellion towards God.
When heading a group he claims is growing, the numbers speak clearly about how inflated his ego must be. I warmly recommend checking up on him before you ever get involved with his group, the Restored Church of God.
He deeply hates freedom of speech - especially when anyone dares challenge his veteran opinions. It is highly offensive, according to "Should Accusers Be Answered", that anyone would question him. He really feels inspired to a level that anything which contradicts him must be rebellion towards God.
When heading a group he claims is growing, the numbers speak clearly about how inflated his ego must be. I warmly recommend checking up on him before you ever get involved with his group, the Restored Church of God.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Beware of David Pack and his "Restored" Church of God
Anyone thinking David Pack and his "Restored" COG would be an improved form of fellowship should read this article "David C Pack Declares Himself an Apostle" from the Exit Support Network.
David Pack is the ultimate version of Armstrongism, and you should definitely read this while you have time so you are warned about the nature of his message.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The coming week, articles will focus on recovering from the effects of cults by reprinting some of the articles I have already written on EzineArticles on the subject.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
David Pack is the ultimate version of Armstrongism, and you should definitely read this while you have time so you are warned about the nature of his message.
The coming week, articles will focus on recovering from the effects of cults by reprinting some of the articles I have already written on EzineArticles on the subject.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Case Study: United Church of God - David Hulme et al
The history of the United Church of God, originally established by David Hulme, is one very different from other parts of Armstrongism in one key area. Where almost all splinters from the WCG had very strong leadership from the top down - in an effort to claim this should be "theocracy" - then the UCG tried to establish a form of democracy. This democracy was claimed to be in effect through the Council of Elders.
David Hulme was somewhat offended when he was removed from office of President as you can read in Ambassador Report, issue 68 from April 1998 in the article entitled "United Dethrones Hulme".
David Hulme went off to establish his new magazine Vision, and apparently has a teaching assignment as "lecturer in Middle East Politics at the University of Southern California" [source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hulme]besides presiding over Church of God, an International Community.
Recent EventsWhen you read the paragraphs under the subheading "History" on Wikipedia, you get a feel for the fact that the people on the Council of Elders could need a course in communication.
All the leaders were instructed in the authoritarian leadership style so widespread in Armstrongism, and it is therefore no wonder that seniority and jealousy befall people who have been used to being tails that moved as the dog wanted. Now that each tail tries to wag the dog, confusion comes.
If these people had been trained in what many of them tried to identify as "servant leadership" they would have discussed the points instead of insisting on their own little petty points. In such an environment they could have cooperated instead of fighting against one another.
In Comes David Pack on the Scene
If you read the article "The Resurgence of (Herbert W.) Armstrongism" you can see that David Pack, in an effort to get more donors for his Restored Church of God, has started an offensive to get more members and donors.
It is rather logical - when seen from his Armstrongite perspective - that he now wants to claim that all would have been well if only they had chosen his "theocratic" form of government. His dedication to Armstrongism is so deep that he would never even consider if there was something wrong with humans trying to define what would be "the government of God" when all groups have been so big sources of disagreements, strife and envy.
The history of Armstrongism is filled with people being expelled/excommunicated/disfellowshipped for speaking their minds. Instead of carefully assessing whether there was validity behind the arguments laid forward, it was often called rebellion by leadership - and consequently the impression of many is that they should just "Shut up, pay and pray"...
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
First Case: The "Restored" Church of God - David C Pack
The first case study is interesting in the sense that they themselves claim to be different from all the other COGs - source: http://www.thercg.org/sep/articles/sep_htrcgd.html.
When you check out their "Splinter Explanation Packet" page [source: http://www.thercg.org/sep/home.html] it quickly becomes clear that the ONLY answer to critics they want to give is the claim that since Jesus promised followers would be persecuted, then the very fact that people speak out against the RCG would somehow be an approval of the RCG.
This would be like claiming that if your husband was a shitty driver, and someone pointed that out, then it would be "persecution" - even though the facts showed you had numerous cars towed away to the scrapyard... :-)
In the middle of the page you will see numerous videos, and the last one should probably be viewed first. "Should Accusers Be Answered - Do You Believe Obvious Lies?" is the obvious excuse, once again, for continuing the authoritarian government while claiming this should somehow be "the government of God". Saddam Hussein also claimed he was a man of God - even though that was an arab version of that same type of government.
Much abuse has been going on in the COGs through the years, but what really hurts them - also in the other Armstrongism groups - is that ministers can no longer hide the facts as they could when they simply disfellowshipped people, and then "faithful" members would stay away from these people. Freedom has come from the internet because now people can check up on these matters on the internet themselves.
Of course, people such as David Pack, Roderick Meredith, Gerald Flurry and many other "leading ministers" will speak out against this - and have done so - but this was only to "protect the flock" as they will claim. Would anyone ever suspect them of being self-serving? Probably not within the COGs, but people who have exited know better, because one must be very isolationist to believe these explanations from so-called ministers.
Armstrongism is cultic and isolationist, and these mini case studies should serve to enlighten you on the various groups, and offers a good opportunity for people who exited each group to offer comments on the particular group being reviewed.
Feel free to comment.
When you check out their "Splinter Explanation Packet" page [source: http://www.thercg.org/sep/home.html] it quickly becomes clear that the ONLY answer to critics they want to give is the claim that since Jesus promised followers would be persecuted, then the very fact that people speak out against the RCG would somehow be an approval of the RCG.
This would be like claiming that if your husband was a shitty driver, and someone pointed that out, then it would be "persecution" - even though the facts showed you had numerous cars towed away to the scrapyard... :-)
In the middle of the page you will see numerous videos, and the last one should probably be viewed first. "Should Accusers Be Answered - Do You Believe Obvious Lies?" is the obvious excuse, once again, for continuing the authoritarian government while claiming this should somehow be "the government of God". Saddam Hussein also claimed he was a man of God - even though that was an arab version of that same type of government.
Much abuse has been going on in the COGs through the years, but what really hurts them - also in the other Armstrongism groups - is that ministers can no longer hide the facts as they could when they simply disfellowshipped people, and then "faithful" members would stay away from these people. Freedom has come from the internet because now people can check up on these matters on the internet themselves.
Of course, people such as David Pack, Roderick Meredith, Gerald Flurry and many other "leading ministers" will speak out against this - and have done so - but this was only to "protect the flock" as they will claim. Would anyone ever suspect them of being self-serving? Probably not within the COGs, but people who have exited know better, because one must be very isolationist to believe these explanations from so-called ministers.
Armstrongism is cultic and isolationist, and these mini case studies should serve to enlighten you on the various groups, and offers a good opportunity for people who exited each group to offer comments on the particular group being reviewed.
Feel free to comment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)