Posted on 03/22/2005 12:56:07 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo
TONIGHT: Tuesday, March 22, 2004 10:00 p.m. Central Time (Milwaukee area)
TITLE: "INSIDE THE LIVING CHURCH OF GOD"
Inside the Living Church of God Tonight at live at 10:00,what really goes on inside The Living Church of God? A warning from former members, new tonight live at 10:00 on TODAY'S TMJ4.
WTMJ TV investigative news reporter has done some in-depth investigation of the sect (mainline Christian denominations refer to it as a 'cult') which was the site, in a Brookfield, Wisconsin hotel, of a mass shooting by Living Church of God church member Terry Ratzmann earlier this month.
Bump for those in the Milwaukee viewing area.
bump
How long until some CoG-er has this thread pulled?
They can't retrieve all the stuff on the internet, bursting at the seams, now about this sect (re: input from former members and current members' estranged family members), nor can they clean their tracks on the web, what with neat tools such as the "Wayback Machine" that archives millions of website pages.
They can try to pull a "Dan Rather" but they are going to be "Buckhead"-ed, just the same.
The Living Church of God grew out of the 'Armstrong' church (aka Worldwide Church of God).
It's another control group; i.e. Jehovahs Witnesses, Moonies, etc., etc. Not to mention the usual predictions of "end times" (like JWs)
Big shocker, not.
Steven Hassan, who is an interesting fellow as an aside, has some more info: http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/w/wcog/
Interesting. Thank you for your input.
Yeah, but I'm pissed it got pulled from FR. Do you happen to have the URL from our pulled thread?
The subliminal message will be ... it's God's fault.
Now I'm going to have to watch it.
('shoulda' kept my mouth shut ... er .... fingers bound.)
Those who watch this report might also note and report on a disjointed insertion about "automatic weapons." It won't have anything to do with the story but will be introduced with something like "And, had the shooter used one of the new ... readily available in evil shops all over the area, the death toll...."
It seems as if one of the victims (not shot but left) was black.
I believe they may be heading more in the directions that church teaching was a contributing factor to the shooting, although nobody absolves the shooter. The teachings apparantly discouraged anyone from seeking professional mental care (and this guy was a ticking time bomb), and also not to marry outside their sect, and some pretty heavy other guilt trips. I haven't heard the "guns are the problem" angle hardly, in respect to this story. Just some overseas press from liberals that foolishly would try to blame guns.
I believe there were many websites citing this group as a 'cult' even before the shootings. But, people will have to see the program to come to a conclusion.
"Do you happen to have the URL from our pulled thread?"
Here it is:
WISCONSIN SECT (SHOOTING) FOCUSED ON "END TIME" PROPHECY [LIVING CHURCH OF GOD] AP, Online ^ | 13 March 2004 | AP http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1362116/posts
One of my posts in that thread:
To: AmericanInTokyo; ewin; BJClinton; Ex church member; Just mythoughts
Regarding my origional question to ewin and then DouglasKC:
"...Does your Armstrong-spin-off church (the United Church of God) still counsel its baptised members only to marry inside your church? If so, and the member defied the leadership and went ahead and married someone who wasn't a baptised member of only your particular "church", would that person be disfellowshipped? ..." Here
Douglas responded here. and ewin responded here
AmericanInToyko wrote: "Looks like the answer ..to your specific, simple question was inconclusive (in terms of present day teachings or rules) of such a church as the United Church of God. Maybe we could send an e mail to the church on line, and ask them their policy. The response, if it did come, might be interesting. Of course, if a response did not come, that would in and of itself be a response, I suppose....." HERE
* You wouldn't know any more than you already know now even if you did write them.
Like all cults, the Armstrong cults all re-define Christian terms and unless you know what meaning they are pouring into the terms they use, you will be totally confused. Most Everything they say "sounds" perfectly OK to the uninitiated.
When I asked the question above, I made it a point to specify "their particular church", because I know that unless someone has been baptised by immersion by one of "the ministers in their particular Armstrong cult spin-off church", they don't consider them to be converted Christians.
So any time you see them use the words, "the church" or "the faith", or "ministers of Jesus Christ" you must know ahead of time that they are only talking about one of the Armstrong cult-spinoff churches, and their ordained ministers. Other churches are heathen churches to them.
With that in mind, notice the terms and phrases that Douglas and ewin used, using Scriptural references, which of themselves are quite true (which is what makes the uninitiated who don't understand how the cults operate think they're in agreement with them):
Douglas: "...the scriptures state one should marry within the faith." --- [Sounds great, huh? That is until you realize that "the faith" they're talking about is only the doctrine that Armstrong taught.]
"A converted person (baptized, possessing God’s Holy Spirit) should marry another converted person." --- [This refers only to one who has been "counseled" by an Armstrong spin-off church "minister" and found worthy of being baptised by one of their own. Only then can he "receive the Holy Spirit" and become a member of "the God Family" --- of which there are only two members --- so far.]
"...we should advise them about the pitfalls of a believer marrying an unbeliever." --- [And you're not a "believer" unless you have been pronounced to be a believer by one of the Armstrong cult spin-off "ministers"]
"A minister is not required to perform any marriage which violates his conscience." --- [And of course it's well understood that no true "minister of God" would ever think of joining a non-Armstrong spin-off church member with one of the heathen who might be a member of another "church".]
"Any minister who either feels strongly that he should perform the wedding, or who feels it is the appropriate thing to do given the fact the couple will marry anyway, should seek advice from his regional pastor (or international equivalent). The purpose in this is to prevent a person from “shopping around” until he finds a minister who will perform the wedding. As ministers of Jesus Christ we should strive to work together in these matters." --- [And of course, there is something terribly wrong with any "minister of Jesus Christ" who is even entertaining such a thought. He will be "counseled" and booted out if he doesn't come around and see "the plain truth"]
. "If a member (believer) chooses to marry a non-member (unbeliever), no punitive action should be taken unless there are other extenuating circumstances." --- [That little "unless" will - sooner or later - be well understood to mean, "there WILL be extenuating circumstances". Hahaha]
"Each person must make his own decision in these matters and he will have to live with his choices." --- [And everyone involved understands the implications of that veiled warning].
"This should clearly be pointed out in the counseling." --- [And "clearly" it WILL be pointed out, too. Hahaha]
ewin: "...it would probably be unwise to marry a person who is not in the Church... I don't think any of the COGs will disfellowship members if they do so. Some members in the past may have been." ~ --- [Didn't you say that you've been in Armstrong's "church" and now in the biggest Armstrong spin-off (the United Church of God) for over 30 years? Yet you say that some "may have been" disfellowshipped, as if you have no clue of the facts. Some may probably be willing to believe that.]
* Those who don't want to be misled by the cults need to educate themselves as to how they re-define "Christian" terms. I've only given you the tip of the iceberg. You can begin your education HERE http://www.waltermartin.org/cults.html#semant
352 posted on 03/16/2005 4:46:32 PM EST by Matchett-PI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1362116/posts?page=352#352
The URLS to two other posts of mine:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1362116/posts?page=362#362
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1362116/posts?page=363#363
This thread got pulled???
What do you mean by "this" thread?
BTTT It's time!
"What do you mean by "this" thread?"
Wrong word 'this', should have used "the" or "a" thread, I have been sidetracked and not paying attention to the conversation, and saw something about thread being pulled and was curious.
Hope this explains my question.
Oh, OK. Yes, the other "thread" was pulled. But I keep personal archive records on my desk top of what I post and what "certain" people post to me - just to be on the safe side. They can get threads pulled and run -- but they can't hide. Hahahaha
Is there a reason why it got pulled?
The official reason per the moderator - (in response to being ordered by a well-known complainer) to "do your duty", was "This has gone on long enough". Hahahaha
Basically a CoG-er got offended that someone on the thread may have implied the CoG was a little culpable in the shootings. They mentioned AiT and Matchett but really failed to address anything I or other recovering CoG-ers said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.