Ryan Responds

Early this morning we had some comments left on some older posts by Ryan.  While it’s not clear that Ryan is a PKG member, he clearly is drinking Ron’s Flavor Aid.  In order to consolidate the discussion, and since people tend to ignore older posts concentrating on the more recent ones, I am quoting a couple of his posts here.

One of his comments on a posting from last year reads:

Now we see how it is that people do twist and distort what is said.  Mr. Weinland did not call God a liar as was stated that he did, and neither did God lie to him or anybody else.  This is not how he explained the second time-line.

Ryan, that point is discussed in some detail on my last post and in its comments.  It’s quite clear that either God lied or Ron lied.  All of Ron’s BS explanations justifying his change to the second timeline don’t change that there was some lying going on.

In apparent response to this comment by Whisper, on a post in which we were discussing Ron’s ruptured appendix:

The longer Ron is “out of action” the more time his sheeples will have to assess the situation and possibly, oh my goodness, allow some doubts to rise to the top and be thought upon. How can the most POWERFUL man ever birthed with the full power of GOD behind him and whom is immune to DEATH and who’s enemies and detractors shall be PUNISHED in the exact same way the attempt to harm the Witness, who is Gods Final Witness and one (spokesman mind you of both as the other is a woman and can’t speak) of the 2 Witness’s of REVELATION, who is a APOSTLE and the end time ELIJAH, how can he suffer from such a malady as a pandects that would indeed be life threatening if not for medical treatment by others? How can such a powerful man who’s prophesied stock and trade is miracles (although destructive) of God be afflicted by such mundane maladies? Doesn’t these maladies make Ron look, oh… HUMAN? MORTAL? You know, one of the rank and file, another man, no better or worse than the whole?

Ryan responded:

Whisper, that is the point, Mr. Weinland is indeed human, and his books never said that he would be immune to sickness, but he just won’t die is all.  This is like the things I’ve heard about him not utilizing his prized Witness powers to shut up the heavens to make it not snow or rain so that he will be able to travel to wherever he goes.  But convenience is not the reason for those powers, whether it would be him or anybody else, helping out themselves would not be the reason for Witness powers, but do you really think so though ?

Apparently Ryan was also responding to my post about Ronnie’s itinerary change due to last year’s snowpocalypse or possibly the follow-up post which also mentioned the End-Time-Elijah’s susceptibility to poison ivy and perfumes.  Setting aside whether or not God’s Most Formidable Prophet should be vulnerable to maladies and whether or not he prophesied during the days of his recovery from appendicitis, let’s address the appropriate use of Witness Powers.  Ryan, if it’s trivial to use Witness Powers to enable the End-Time Prophet to keep to his itinerary and preach the word of God, then why is it not a trivial use of Witness Powers to put a death curse on mockers who don’t impede his prophesying in the slightest?  And speaking of Ronnie’s death curse (which BTW was the only exercise of his Witness Powers), whether it was trivial or not, why am I (his most persistent mocker) still mocking away over two years after he called for my speedy death?  Why did Ronnie find it necessary to spiritualize my death?  Which BTW is total BS — I find that my blogging activity has been a positive personal development exercise for me.  The people who are really suffering as a result of Ron’s activities are the family members of his followers.

And why would the use of Witness Powers to prove himself as God’s End-Time Prophet be a trivial use?  Seems to me that turning a few fountains into blood would be an effective way to make people take him seriously and consider his warnings so that God could show his mercy on them.  Speaking of proving himself to be a prophet of God and death curses, why are all 5 of the specific individuals who were to die early on as proof of Weinland as a prophet of God still alive?  Reminder, this was a test Ron defined for himself on page 108 of his latest book.  It was just over 4 years ago that he wrote these individuals letters calling on them to repent or else.  They didn’t repent and there was no “or else” either.

So, I’ve had my response.  You can respond as well.  And so can everyone else.  And like Ryan, let’s disagree agreeably.  We’ve had a couple of PKG members on this blog, Fred Roberts and Zach(helpingusoon), who were very obnoxious.  But Ryan has been respectful and so should you.  Well, we’ll give Kirrily some latitude to be snarky since she’s an ex-PKG-member, but no name-calling.  Your turn.

Tags: ,

56 Comments

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    RYAN – this is my open statement to you. As for me, and many other here, we are not MOCKING Ronald Weinland. He said X, Y, and Z were going to happen, They didn’t. To point that out is not mocking it is stating the truth. According to the Bible, Jesus Christ himself didn’t know the time of his return down to the day. Ron’s “knowing” that day directly contradicts both the Biblical statement “no one will know” and Christ’s not knowing. A man who contradicts the Bible cannot be a prophet of God according to that very same Bible. Mn who says things then states that God has changed his mind about them is NOT a prophet, Elijah, disciple, representative, or spokesman for the God of Abraham.

    I only point that out because I am an ex-WWCG church member under Herbert W. Armstrong. He did the same thing; while living the high life, abusing his daughter, not following the laws he demanded his followers were ordered to obey extremely strictly, and amassing lots of money. This is the guy Ronald Weinland is modelling and taking over for. And many of us know his script before he even says it, because he is saying what any and all false prophets say; Their prophecies are true until God changes them hours after they don’t come true, it’s the follower’s faith that changed the timeline, any and all criticism is mocking, any and all reportage on RW outside of his media is “distortion”, and so on and so on. Predictions are not prophecies, and saying ‘God told me’ is no fact unless it comes exactly true to the second and description.

    Don’t think of us as either your or RW’s enemy. We are not mocking. We are telling the TRUTH. It is our moral duty as human beings. And many of us are devote Christians, Buddhists, agnostics, etc, and thus believe it is our spiritual duty to try and show you that RW’s way is abusive and dangerous. Don’t be scared of us. Listen to us. We are not trying to seduce you away from the truth. We are trying to show you that whatever truth is out there (and we are all looking for it as well as you) that RW FOR SURE is not telling you ANY truth at all.

  • J says:

    …why am I (his most persistent mocker) still mocking away over two years after I called for his speedy death?

    That’s a typo, right? He called for your speedy death, not vice versa.

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    Oops!!! Thanks, J. (Yes, we’ll call it a typo. If Ronnie can spiritualize his mistakes, I can call mine “typos” 😀 )

  • Kirrily Xpkg says:

    Ryan, I’m so bored with your posts I can’t be bothered replying, except to write what I’ve just written. Night night all, from the land down under ….. zzzzzzzz

  • Whisper says:

    “And why would the use of Witness Powers to prove himself as God’s End-Time Prophet be a trivial use? Seems to me that turning a few fountains into blood would be an effective way to make people take him seriously and consider his warnings so that God could show his mercy on them.”

    EXACTLY! If one has Holy Power given by God to use it to show the mass’s and the rulership what the score it IS THE WHOLE POINT! Moses did not hold back, per the bible(s), one second. How is one to show others their HOLY intent if they in fact do not use the powers they are given? Words? Actions? Well Ron has destructive words and almost no actions (Canada being his last one that I not and it was a failure as he ran from a stage comedian… let me state that again: A STAGE COMEDIAN. How can you run from a Stage Comedian and still keep you dignity? Use your powers, turn water to blood, call down a plauge, predict an exact and low probablity future event (There will be a 8.6 earthquake in London England on March 12th – 2011 at 2:05 PM local that will topple Big Ben and cause 8 bridges to fall into the Thames). Now that would get notarity! Film crews would be all over Ron at which point he could make a second equally compelling prophecy on world wide televison so everybody could hear it and when that 2nd prediciton came fully true then the world could turn to Ron for his words and he would lead the Christian World. It’s hard to oppose someone with such Holy backup is it not? Then others would attack Ron and they woulde be inflicted with the damage they wanted to do Ron (per the bible again) and Ron could light up a few with firey breath. The world would flip! How could you deny someone like that? All of Egypt came to acknowledge that Moses was imbibed with HOLY power for the miracles he pronounced upon Egypt. No one could deny it and Pharoh finally submitted. What is Ron waiting for? Do it! Breath Fire! Cause calamity! Kill – Destroy – make Gods word come alive!

    But this is all silly, Ron can not as he has nothing? Can’t even make one supreme Mocker keel over and die even less so his direct competators of COG splinters. Can’t get one trumpet to sound as predicted or more than one thunder…

    Pretty lame if you ask me. When does this pathetic ho-down end anyway, 2012? Can’t get here fast enough.

    Go figure?

  • Atrocious says:

    Ryan, you are only saying what you are told to say. You are thinking what you are told to think. You are defending a man who cannot be defended. He has proven, PROVEN himself to be a false prophet. He HAS NOT PROVEN himself to be a prophet of God. Everything he has said would come to pass, when they would come to pass, has not come to pass. He stated that if things did not happen EXACTLY as he said they would happen, in the timing he said they would happen, then he would declare himself to be a false prophet and he would stop preaching. To do anything else would be insane. It didn’t happen, and he didn’t stop preaching or declare himself to be a false prophet. Ryan, that makes him out to be a liar. Wise up, Ryan. Look at the evidence. The evidence speaks for itself.

  • Mark says:

    I remember when I was in the thick of Armstrongism in my early 20s a relative had a book called “Kingdom of the Cults” and I just dismissed that and thought he really needed to understand what the Bible says about prophecy because we are certainly in the end times.
    Honestly, I didn’t like reading the Gospels unless it was the verses which talked about the end time. My favorite movie was “The Day After” (about nuclear holocaust) and I watched the news always looking for signs that we were “near the end”.

    What changed? Seeing the doctrinal errors of HWA. Seeing the truth of the gospel. The REAL gospel.
    The real gospel would set you free as it did for me.

  • Mal says:

    Avalokiteshvara said:

    “Ron’s “knowing” that day directly contradicts both the Biblical statement “no one will know” and Christ’s not knowing.”

    I don’t agree and, actually, neither does Mike (unless I misunderstood him).

    Other Bible passages indicate that the missing information about Christ’s return will be made known.

  • me says:

    But of that day and hour no one knows. I believe that most would and could agree that this is speaking in present tense and not future tense. It does not read “no one will know.”

  • Whisper says:

    Actually “me” I had rather thought it was speaking of all tenses, past and present and future. NO one will know, No one. Only God. Not the Angles, not the Son, not any one – period. That is what the passage states in clear enough words. It does not state now, it does not state in the future, it does not state that this was the case in the past. It states “NO ONE” will know.

    Am I typing to fast? Is anyone still lost here?

  • Mark says:

    “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.” Acts 1:7

  • Mark says:

    Will one of the two witnesses have to take her diamond rings off before she starts preaching?

  • Mark says:

    Why exactly is there a “silent” witness? Show me where in the Bible is a “spokesman” witness? Chapter and verse please.

  • Mal says:

    Whisper said: “It states “NO ONE” will know”.

    Sorry Whisper, it doesn’t say “will know”.

    Mark’s Scripture (Acts 1:7) is also present tense.

  • Baywolfe says:

    Mark, I personally wouldn’t care if everything Ron preaches is in the Bible, vertabum. It’s still just a book full of many OT stories that did not literally happen, OT historical accounts framed as “prophecy”, and scrolls written by unknown authors purporting to use the name of early church figures for some unknown purpose, along with a very strange person, Paul, who appears to be creating a brand new version of Christianity, while the original one was still in existence.

    And then the whole NT was created by cherry-picking these scrolls by the leading political/religious figures of the time.

    It’s a fastinating view of our beliefs and myths, but the only real value to us in the whole book was summed up by Christ with, “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” And, for those of you to choose to believe in a God, “Love the Lord with all the heart…, etc.”

    Every other aspect of the Christian religion is just selling someting and collecting tithes.

  • Mark says:

    I agree with Whisper. No one knows. Past, present or future.

    But, Ron’s “special secret knowledge” is Ron’s biggest selling point, which he has been 0% accurate on to date. Which ALL date setters prior to, current with, and following Ron will be wrong about. And Ronnie said he was different than the rest. Shame shame shame on him. Well, when he had to put his money where his mouth was, he just couldn’t do what he said he would do on ALLLL those radio programs and in ALLLLL those sermons. You could hear how scared he was in his voice in 2008 when he thought he was going to lose all of his followers (and tithe money).

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    The “no man knows” Vs “no man will ever know” is a question Ronnie used to get way way back when he would do interviews. That was really a softball because he had a ready answer.

    But I got to thinking — if we’re going to parse the tense of that statement, then why not any other statement? For example, nothing in the Bible should be regarded as a command because it was written 2000 or more years ago.

  • Karen Mustard says:

    Further more…no man NEEDS to know….. What does it benefit a man to know the dates of the tribulation or Christ’s return? If you believe scripture, and believe Christ died for your sins….you are already… READY!!!

  • Ryan says:

    Avalokiteshvara, I never said that just merely pointing out where you guys think he is wrong is considered mocking, and some Weinland supporters might think it’s mocking, but I personally don’t think it is. But by making fun of somebody’s speech, like mocking how he says “nukular”, this is just disrespectfull, I don’t care whether or not Weinland is a false prophet, this is wrong regardless. Making fun of a man, especially a dead man, by calling him Herbie, this just isn’t right either. Many of you don’t just merely point out where Weinland is wrong, sometimes you’ll go on a spree of making it out like some kind of skit, having exchanges back in forth in one comment posting, scoffing and making fun of the things that he believes. Whether he is wrong or not, would this give the excuse to retaliate. It would be like if I called Jack as Jacko, or Mikey as Mikey, or Whisper as Whizzy or something, just because I don’t agree with them ? I would be wrong in doing this. Some believe that things Weinland says are harsh, and I don’t believe so, but let’s just say Weinland is saying bad things out of line about people, does this warrant somebody doing it to him just because he did it to them ? Mike, I saw you say that it’s not okay for people on here to bash the people on this thread, but when it comes to Weinland, you said “so I am entitled to do this to him.” Where in the Bible does God give people His blessing for them to mock or make fun of somebody just because you don’t agree with them or you dislike them ? I know you believe in God, Jesus Christ, and the Bible, so why do you feel like you’re entitled when God never said that we are ?

    I might be responding to more postings in this particular thread, so please just be on stand by for a bit tonight.

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    I don’t require biblical permission to mock a lying false prophet. Kind of mild in the scheme of things when the Bible say he should die. And mocking him is not disrespectful. Weinland deserves no respect, so it’s impossible to be disrespectful to him.

    And while we’re on the topic, why am I still alive? Over two years after Weinland reissued the death curse he initially issued 3 years ago next month?

    And how do you know?

    And give me one good reason that you believe Weinland is a prophet of God. Besides him saying that he is.

  • Ryan says:

    “Ron’s ‘knowing’ that day directly contradicts both the Biblical statement “no one will know” and Christ’s not knowing.”

    This isn’t even what the Bible says though. Jesus Christ stated that “no man knows the day or the hour, not the angels in Heaven, not even the Son of Man, but the Father only”. Nowhere does it state that no one will know, or that nobody can know, and in fact, this is one thing that is used to show that God’s people today CAN indeed know because neither God nor anybody else in the Bible ever placed restriction upon nobody knowing at any point in the future. Christ simply stated that “nobody knows”, that “only God the Father” knows. This was absolutely true, nobody did know the timing at the time that Christ said that nobody [presently] knows (he was speaking in the present-tense). If you take nobody knows to mean that nobody will ever know, then you have basically called God a liar because God states in Amos 3:7 that He surely does nothing before revealing His secrets (or mysteries) to His servants the prophets. How much clearer could one get to show that God reveals first ? If God reveals to His servants first, then doesn’t this speak volumes that God’s servants gain the spiritual understanding before others do ? You can think that anybody is false whom claims to have spiritual understand when the rest of the World doesn’t, but this is what the Bible says in so many places, that this World is blinded to what is true of God.

    You also spoke about Armstrong living lavishly. God doesn’t just work with the ultra-poor you know, and yes he mainly works in the minds of the unfortaunte because they already live humbling lives, although Armstrong wasn’t always so fortunate either though, he had lost his business, it was all over, and God was calling Him. But plus, if God is to use a powerfull voice through a human-being to proclaim God’s gospel of the Kingdom into all of the World, wouldn’t God need to raise this person up enough so that he would have the notariety and financial means with which to be able to go out into all the World teaching the gospel of the Kingdom ? If he did this with somebody whom was dirt poor and had nothing to show for, would this kind of person have been able to go into all the World, especially in a place like the Great Hall in Shanghai, China ? Not as many would have accepted him to even come to speak, and he wouldn’t have been able to anyhow with the lack of financing, so I see this as being absolutely necessary.

    Armstrong abusing his daughter. We know that this hasn’t been proven, and no this doesn’t prove that it didn’t happen, but what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty, at least by America’s standards, and I know that many of you hold steadfastly to your American values very strongly, so why not at least say that a man is innocent until proven guilty. This doesn’t mean that somebody is surely innocent just because of no convictions, but why believe somebody whom feel very very personal against him for other things that he might have done, or because of events not fully transpiring within his life-time then the rumours of him abusing his daughter MUST be true because he must be so very evil to have been wrong about those things, evil enough to be involved in incestuous relationships.

    “that RW FOR SURE is not telling you ANY truth at all”. This is the kind of thing I mean, to actually say that his prophecies failed so NOTHING he says could even possibly be true. Even if he is a false prophet, this doesn’t mean that he couldn’t say something the is Biblically true, such as stating that nobody goes to Heaven when Jesus Christ and Peter both stated this as being factual, so are we to deny what God and Jesus Christ says just because they might happen to be something that a false servant is saying ?

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    Armstrong was not independently wealthy before he started preaching. He was downright poor. His lavish lifestyle was financed by tithes. As far as his incestuous relationship with his daughter, this blog is not a court of law. As far as I’m concerned, a newspaper article quoting a lawyer’s statement about it is good enough for me. A lawyer would know better than to state something that would be slander if not true.

  • Ryan says:

    Whisper, I don’t believe that God gives the powers to his 2 Witnesses to show great miracles to have the whole World flock to him, that’s not what it’s about. For one thing, we don’t know that everybody would flock to him anyhow, because much of the World would get hopping angry with them for causing such great destruction, so there might not be as many following them as you might think. What God wants to show it that mankind by nature is generally stubborn in what they believe all the way through death. No, what has to happen is for people to be stripped of everything that they have ever put their hope, faith, and trust in to the point where Christ’s gospel of the coming Kingdom is the only hope left to cling onto, and many will still not budge, but many will though. The other thing is that God desires to show us that mankind would bring himself to total extinction if it weren’t for God’s intervention to stop this from happening. There is great purpose in the way God planned the tribulation to be manifested. It’s not all about showing that his witness has divine power and then everybody flocking to believe him, it runs much deeper than this. They might initially flock to them, but then they might still get upset with him because of all of the destruction. Remember that even after everything the Bible says about the tribulation, so many at the end will still want to kill those 2 Witnesses for what they have destroyed, so you’re not dealing with people that want the truth anyhow, they just want the destruction to stop.

    Mike, I’m trying to get more replies in, could we hold off until I go through everybody’s ?

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    Wow! You are DEFENDING someone who according to the Bible is a False Prophet, who has openly lied to “his” people that if he was wrong about 2008 he would QUIT preaching because he is a FALSE PROPHET (his own words)? Why don’t you hold Ronald Weinland to the same standards you hold us to? Ronald Weinland cursed Mike to DIE speedily from the inside. Is Ronald Weinland innocent until proven guilty? God didn’t give HWA the money to do his work, POOR widows with NO INCOME did. People sold their houses and didn’t go to university because HWA told them a. universities were evil and b. send that money in as tithes. People died because they didn’t take medicine because Herbie tricked them into thinking that was GOD’S will.

    Ryan, there is something seriously wrong with you if you truly believe Ronald Weinland should be defended in any way for what he has done. But I don’t believe you do. I personally think you are merely an Internet troll with good grammar and spelling.

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    “Mike, I’m trying to get more replies in, could we hold off until I go through everybody’s?” – Ryan

    Now you’re telling Mike how and when to run HIS blog? Nice! You are a real class act…

  • Ryan says:

    Atrocious, I know Weinland said that he would call himself a false prophet and would quit ministering, but isn’t it possible that he said those things because he felt very sure in his faith of what God’s Church had always believed about Christ returning on Trumpets ? Why wouldn’t you expect God’s prophet to use what is believed to be the truth in the Church, especially having gone uncorrected about it for such a long time, to give a timeline based upon what the Church had long believed ? Don’t you think that if he used anything else that this would have been wrong and would have gone outside of the faith of the Church ? It doesn’t matter that he got the timing wrong, even if it stated that he would be a false prophet if the timing was wrong, because he didn’t anticipate that God would be correcting long-held knowledge in the Church, and only God had the power to know this in advance, Weinland was putting everything on the line based upon belief that God never corrected. Yes, I know it seems convenient to chalk it up to being that correction was given after-the-fact, but why is this not at least possible though ? It would be one thing if most of his prophecies didn’t hinge upon the original timing for Christ returning on Trumpets, but since so much of what he said would come to pass did hinge on Christ returning on Trumpets, it altered nearly everything regarding the timing of things. People can choose to get upset about this, but get upset at God if you’re going to, why can’t it be in His perfect timing to reveal and correct when He best sees fit ?

    I can just about guarantee you that if any of God’s prophets or apostles had seen that the Church long believed that Christ would return on Trumpets, and knowing that 2008 was the juncture point of the timing, they would have given just as Weinland gave, because they can only be judged on what God gave them to see, and if God never gave them to see that Christ returning on Trumpets was not accurate, then they can’t be judged according to something that went uncorrected because it wasn’t God’s purpose to reveal the timing just yet. Weinland admitted that he was wrong about the timing of events, he admitted this straight-up, but he also said that he wasn’t speaking presumptuously because the Church had long believed in Christ on Trumpets, so to use ANYTHING ELSE to give a timeline would have been presumptuous, but not if what was used was Church doctrine that went uncorrected for so long. Now, if that belief did not exist in the Church, then he would have been VERY presumptuous and would have had to have repented like BIG-TIME.

    Lying means intentfull deceit. Let’s just say that Weinland is a true prophet of God. Would stating that he would end his ministry because he had full confidence and faith in what the Church had believed (uncorrected), was this intending to lie because he stated something out of faith. The only way he would be a liar is if he KNEW that nothing would occur but yet stated things anyhow, then he would have been intending to lie. Discovering that the timing was not correct does not make him a liar to continue preaching, but he had to humble himself to see that the timing was wrong and to accept correction from God. Any of the people from Biblical times would have done the very same thing if they had full faith in God’s Church.

  • Ryan says:

    Avalokiteshvara, I am not telling Mike how to run his blog, he in no way has to honour my request at all, I was just merely requesting is all I was doing. I was not demanding or ordering him to do anything. This is a prime exampe of twisting and distorting so very simple. Telling is different than politely requesting.

  • Ryan says:

    “What changed? Seeing the doctrinal errors of HWA. Seeing the truth of the gospel. The REAL gospel.
    The real gospel would set you free as it did for me.”

    Are you saying that the real gospel is not about God’s Kingdom coming just as Jesus Christ said ? Is the real gospel just simply the personage of Jesus Christ, or is it the “gospel of the Kingdom” coming ?

  • Ryan says:

    Whisper, how could “No man knows” mean anything other than the present tense ? If it does mean all tenses, then what about in Daniel when it says for the timing to be sealed until the time of the end, which means to be revealed at the time of the end ? Or how ’bout in Revelation when it says to seal it up until knowledge and travel have been greatly increased ? Or in Amos 3:7 where it says that God surely does nothing without revealing His secrets (mysteries) to His servants the prophets ? This would be a MAJOR contradiction on all fronts if “No man knows” meant all tenses. You know how meticulous the Jews have been in preserving the text of God’s Word, and they show that it’s present-tense. If most of Christianity believes how you do about this verse, then how come the concordances show present tense ?

  • Ryan says:

    Mark, “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.” Acts 1:7

    God was speaking to the people that he was speaking to, that it was not for THEM to know the times or dates. Just like when Daniel asked the angel for more information about the timing he was just given, and he was told to shut up the book until the time of the end, because this wasn’t for anybody to know in their time period.

    Also, it doesn’t have to be in the Bible that one of the 2 witnesses is the spokesman, because it’s not in the Bible the timing that Daniel was not to know in his time, or the people in the book of Acts to know in their time, or for John to know in his time, they were all told that it is not for them to know, and this shouldn’t be assumed to mean that nobody will ever ever know, especially since this would deny 3 of the prophecies from the Bible that this knowledge would be revealed in the last days. Firstly, if women were never given authority by God to be in roles of speaking like preaching (since this is a masculine role and not a feminine role), then it would be safe to surmise that there would have to be a spokesman if one of the 2 witnesses was a woman.

  • Ryan says:

    Baywolfe, I understand what you mean because I used to not be sure what was true in the Bible. Now, it’s one thing to not be sure whether or not something from the Old Testament (like the flood) did occur, but how can you know that this stuff definitely did not occur, how do you know that it didn’t unless you were actually there ? Now, this doesn’t mean that I would know either, but I choose to believe through faith. Even if nothing else in the Bible was true, how do you know that those weren’t stories of things that really actually happened ? Is it because you wouldn’t want to come to the conclusion that yes there is a God that rules over me ? I’m just wondering, not trying to be sarcastic or anything.

    Regarding Paul, I know reading over some of what he spoke could seem weird. For instance, when he talked about doing away of the law, he didn’t say that we are to do away with the Law. If you read further on, it says are we to use this to nullify the law ? Absolutely not. So he’s asking them questions to try to reason with them. Even without Weinland’s sermons, I don’t see how people can read through Paul’s stuff and come to the conclusion that what he said contradicts things about God.

    Also, we wouldn’t know how to love the Lord with all our hearts unless we knew what God gave through the prophets of old, he told us how to love him, and they are contained in the 10 Commandments, more specifically the first 4 Commandments when it comes to just God Himself. God says if you love him that you will keep His Sabbaths holy and to remember them and keep them. If we don’t do this then we fail to love God because then we deny that He has a purpose and plan that He is working out for us.

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    “You know how meticulous the Jews have been in preserving the text of God’s Word”. – Ryan

    Ummm…how do you KNOW that it is God’s Word? Is there a chance that it is *ahem* NOT God’s Word at all? That RW is not one of the Witnesses and a False Prophet because there is a distinct possibility that there is no God of Abraham or god at all if I may be so bold as to suggest such a thing if it is OK with you…

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    “God says if you love him that you will keep His Sabbaths holy and to remember them and keep them. If we don’t do this then we fail to love God” – Ryan

    God says “IF”? If your father said to you IF you love him you will wash his car every Tuesday at 7 pm for your entire life, is that “love”? If you don’t Ryan you “fail” to love your father. Boy, would State/Federal Child Services take your Dad away so fast for emotional neglect and abuse!

    I choose to take God away for spiritual/emotional neglect of his children…and I will love my two adorable daughters FULLY even if they don’t ever keep my birthday holy. I am a WAYY better God than the one you have presented to me…

  • Ryan says:

    Mike, “But I got to thinking — if we’re going to parse the tense of that statement, then why not any other statement? For example, nothing in the Bible should be regarded as a command because it was written 2000 or more years ago.”

    You’re right, we should at least examine the tenses of the words of other statements, and I think even Weinland has, such as Christ coming in the flesh, the tense being present-progressive. The only way that “No man knows” could be then and forever after would be if it was present-progressive, but it wasn’t progressive though. Regarding what you said above though, nothing in the Bible would be a command because of when it was written ? Well, what if it says that such and such is a perpetual covenant ? This is directly stating that it is to be binding for forever and ever. So at least God’s 7th-Day Sabbath and God’s Holy Days are binding forever, although how to actually observe some of them were not perpetual because the meaning was to be revealed later and so thus would be kept different, such as Passover, and how Jesus Christ instituted some changes, like for the sacrificial system.

    Karen Mustard, “Further more…no man NEEDS to know….. What does it benefit a man to know the dates of the tribulation or Christ’s return? If you believe scripture, and believe Christ died for your sins….you are already… READY!!!”

    Because it’s an inspiring and sobering thing to know that Christ’s return is imminent, and also gives a heightened sense of urgency about things. You said that if you believe that Christ died for your sins, then you are already ready. This is not what God’s apostles taught, that the only thing you need to do is know that Christ died for our sins, this is so false. He did die for our sins, but that’s not completes our salvation and brings us into God’s Kingdom. We are to believe and have full faith in him, which includes believing what he said and did, which would mean believing that he was in the heart of the Earth for 3 days and 3 nights, believing that we are to keep the Sabbath Days holy as was taught by Them, believing that war is wrong and is sin rather than believing that war is justified for self-preservation. Christians go against those things and still believe that they have salvation through grace alone ? If it was through grace alone and works mattered not one bit, then why isn’t EVERYBODY gonna be saved then ? Many people think that Paul said that the works are not needed that only faith is needed, even though he said absolutely not when he asked should the Law be made of no effect through faith.

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    Let me say it again…

    “God says if you love him that you will keep His Sabbaths holy and to remember them and keep them. If we don’t do this then we fail to love God” – Ryan

    God says “IF”? If your father said to you IF you love him you will wash his car every Tuesday at 7 pm for your entire life, is that “love”? If you don’t Ryan you “fail” to love your father. Boy, would State/Federal Child Services take your Dad away so fast for emotional neglect and abuse!

    I choose to take God away for spiritual/emotional neglect of his children…and I will love my two adorable daughters FULLY even if they don’t ever keep my birthday holy. I am a WAYY better God than the one you have presented to me…

  • Ryan says:

    Mike, “I don’t require biblical permission to mock a lying false prophet. Kind of mild in the scheme of things when the Bible say he should die. And mocking him is not disrespectful. Weinland deserves no respect, so it’s impossible to be disrespectful to him.” Does it realy matter whether or not you feel he deserves respect ? Let’s say that he is a false prophet. God and Jesus Christ told us to love everybody, including your enemies. Elijah killing some 100 – 200 false prophets. Might not seem like love, but for them to be resurrected in the Great White Throne in a much better World to live in and learn God’s truth in, especially after being false prophets, this is such a mercifull thing, it’s still in love, but only God knows if somebody is better to just die now and live in a different time in a different World, we can’t make such judgements unless it came from God. But if you do indeed believe what God and Jesus Christ say, then why do you feel entitled to disrespect ANYBODY else regardless of who they are or what evil they have done, when they say that you are not to do those things, you know ?

    “Armstrong was not independently wealthy before he started preaching. He was downright poor. His lavish lifestyle was financed by tithes. As far as his incestuous relationship with his daughter, this blog is not a court of law. As far as I’m concerned, a newspaper article quoting a lawyer’s statement about it is good enough for me. A lawyer would know better than to state something that would be slander if not true.”

    I know he wasn’t wealthy before-hand, this is one of the things I was saying. He did continue in his advertising business and so he did make alot of money doing this, especially while in God’s Church because God was no longer giving him the initial mega-humbling that he needed to be called with by losing so much of everything he had. How would know 100% for sure that he got as wealthy as he did through the tithings alone ? The tithes would be instrumental because tithing is required so that God’s work can be done on this Earth, even though God wouldn’t need any of this to perform anything, but God wants His people to share in this responsibility though. So if God’s will is for somebody to preach the gospel into all the World as a witness unto all nations, then why would it be so very wrong for Mr. Armstrong to be using those tithings for travelling ? He probably wouldn’t have been able to accomplish this great commission without the tithings, which are to be used for doing God’s work upon this Earth.

    Armstrong’s daughter. I know this isn’t a court of law, but why would a lawyer’s statement about the the matter be all that you need to prove to yourself that he is guilty ? Don’t lawyers often get something wrong ? If the lawyer didn’t personally witness this incest, then he couldn’t have any idea but to say that Armstrong is guilty simply because he is defending his client. All prosecutors accuse the defendants of being guilty even when sometimes it’s later proven that they were innocent, let’s say through some DNA-testing. So how could a lawyer’s statement be enough for you when many many lawyers get cases wrong ? It’s one thing to accuse somebody of living a lavish life-style, which we know that he did anyhow, but to accuse of incest because of what some lawyer says as if they have supreme authority to know what happend ?

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    Does it realy matter whether or not you feel he deserves respect ?” Yes.
    Let’s say that he is a false prophet.” I do say that. Because he is one.
    God and Jesus Christ told us to love everybody, including your enemies.” Whatever. Whether I love him or not, he’s a false prophet deserving of no respect and a great deal of mockery.

    Might not seem like love, but for them to be resurrected in the Great White Throne in a much better World to live in and learn God’s truth in, especially after being false prophets, this is such a mercifull thing, it’s still in love, but only God knows if somebody is better to just die now and live in a different time in a different World, we can’t make such judgements unless it came from God.
    You obviously haven’t read my post from two weeks ago in which I responded to his “what-if” challenge.

    He did continue in his advertising business and so he did make alot of money doing this, especially while in God’s Church” That’s absolutely true, but absolutely untrue in the sense you meant it. Herbie was successful at advertising his cobbled-together religion and sucking the money out of those foolish enough to believe it.

    but why would a lawyer’s statement about the the matter be all that you need to prove to yourself that he is guilty ?” It wasn’t.
    Don’t lawyers often get something wrong ? If the lawyer didn’t personally witness this incest, then he couldn’t have any idea but to say that Armstrong is guilty simply because he is defending his client.” The statement wasn’t in open court where he might enjoy some legal protection. It was in an interview with a new reporter after the trial was over. The fact that Armstrong didn’t sue the lawyer for making an accusation of such a vile act is quite telling.

    Whether or not Herbert Armstrong was guilty of incest is not the point. Herbie was guilty of being a false prophet. As is Ron Weinland.

  • Ryan says:

    Avalokiteshvara, “Ronald Weinland cursed Mike to DIE speedily from the inside. Is Ronald Weinland innocent until proven guilty?”

    Well firstly, it is not a criminal offense to curse somebody to die from the inside, unless the person threatens that they will be doing this killing. I know that people on here don’t like things to be spiritualized, but since when has anyone meant dying on the inside to be meant physically ? Cursing somebody to die on the inside doesn’t sound physical it all, it sounds like the spirit will be dying. How does this sound like a physical death ? If it was the destruction of your mind, then this did happen very speedily, compounding faster and faster as the time goes on, further and further proving to yourself that Weinland is a false prophet. I mean, if he were to call upon a plague to be cast upon a place like tomorrow, I really highly doubt you would just suddenly quit everything you have come to up to this point to be in awe of him. If Weinland called upon a plague and then it happened, you wouldn’t just begin following him as you already stated that you would never follow him, that you would rather take a long-walk off a short plank into the lake of fire. I was thinking that you possibly might be whom he was referring to when he said that somebody committed the unpardonable sin by doing what they did, and by saying what you said, you already cemented your decision very deeply in your mind, at least how it seems for me. But if I’m wrong, then what would you do if Weinland were to call upon a plague that then happened very powerfully, whether this happened tomorrow or 9 months from now, what would you do if this would be such a clear-cut sign that he is whom he says he is ? I just couldn’t imagine that you would admit that Weinland and Armstrong must have been true all along.

    Regarding people dying from lack of medicine. Yes, Weinland admits that the Church believed in the past that the miracles were of physical healing, not to say that physical healing couldn’t occur for some, but that faith in healing wasn’t always about the physical as they once though. So yes, that was something that the Church had wrong, but since when did God’s Church in the Bible not receive ALOT of correction ? Any church that does things 100% perfectly and never gets corrected on anything that they do, then how can those churches be of God ?

    “Ryan, there is something seriously wrong with you if you truly believe Ronald Weinland should be defended in any way for what he has done. But I don’t believe you do. I personally think you are merely an Internet troll with good grammar and spelling.”

    You don’t think that I believe that Weinland should be defended. Well, I never said that he should be defended, but he should be respected. If I should determine in the future that he’s a false prophet, then I will no longer follow him but I will still respect him as I always have. God and Jesus Christ tells us that we aren’t to do the things that you do, regardless of what they might have done, even if they have murdered. I mean c’mon, the very people whom murdered Jesus Christ, he said forgive them Lord, they don’t know what they’re doing. I mean, it’s like you don’t even want him to have forgiveness as Jesus Christ would desire for even murderers, adulterers, liars, thieves, etc. If you don’t believe that you should do what Christ would have done, then do you even believe God and Jesus Christ then ?

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    So, you seem to be saying that it’s OK to issue a death curse, but not to mock? And don’t throw out the nonsense that the curse was for a spiritual death, not a physical one. At the time it was issued, it clearly was for a physical death. Ron only made it a spiritual death after it was clear that I didn’t suffer a physical death and stop blogging. As far as a spiritual death, I feel better than I have in ages. My personal, professional, and social life was never better.

    I mean, if he were to call upon a plague to be cast upon a place like tomorrow” — so why doesn’t he? As a Witness he has the power, right. No, actually he has the duty, as a Witness, to establish his credentials so that people will listen to him.

    “then what would you do if Weinland were to call upon a plague that then happened very powerfully, whether this happened tomorrow or 9 months from now, what would you do if this would be such a clear-cut sign that he is whom he says he is ? ” Hmmm, that’s like asking me what I would do if pigs would fly. And he’d have to be specific about the nature of the event, exactly which day and and exactly where it happened. Say, do you attend PKG services? Could you ask Ron to curse me with being unable to win a lottery this year? I could use the mega-millions jackpot.

    Well, I never said that he should be defended, but he should be respected.” Let me clear up a misconception. People are not deserving of my respect unless and until they earn it. They’ll get my conditional civility until they either prove themselves to be deserving of respect or until they prove themselves deserving of my scorn, as has Weinland.

  • Ryan says:

    “Ummm…how do you KNOW that it is God’s Word? Is there a chance that it is *ahem* NOT God’s Word at all? That RW is not one of the Witnesses and a False Prophet because there is a distinct possibility that there is no God of Abraham or god at all if I may be so bold as to suggest such a thing if it is OK with you…” Well yes, anything is possible, but it would take quite ALOT for me to believe that everything that exists is the result of randomized primordial soups mixing together just right and with the right spark of lightning was able to evolve into everything we have ever known to exist in terms of life-forms. There is way WAY too much order in how this Earth operates, and order in this Solar-System, and order in this galaxy, and too much order in this whole entire Universe to have all been a series of randomizes accidents and happenstances. I don’t think there is anything that could happen that could show me that there God never existed.

    “God says ‘IF’?” Well, yes, this would be failing to love, but you see this is so much different than simply washing a dirty car, this is about something so much greater than this. Mankind doesn’t understand the beauty of God’s purpose and plan. What would be wrong with God having this purpose and plan to eventually have total peace between everybody into an eternity of growing and learning and loving and caring and helping and sharing and being a family ? Isn’t going through this 6,000 Years of evil worth what would last for eternity ? If this plan is real and true, then why is it a bad thing that disobeying God and the ways He is providing for us to come to know and walk in the ways of peace, why should God feel good about us disobeying Him ?

    “I choose to take God away for spiritual/emotional neglect of his children…and I will love my two adorable daughters FULLY even if they don’t ever keep my birthday holy. I am a WAYY better God than the one you have presented to me…” Then you just don’t understand God, but in time you can, unless you have already worked all of this out in your mind that IF everything God has promised for us is true but yet you’ve decided that you don’t want what God is offering us, then this might be unpardonable, but obviously I’m in no position to be making this kind of judgement though. It’s different with people and their children and a birthday because this birthday has nothing to do with a massive plan whereby evil must be learned in order to come to hate it in order to come to only ever desire peace always. Well, we’ll know just how great God is within the next 14 months, and alot of it within like 11 – 12 months.

  • Ryan says:

    Let me ask you this Avalokiteshvara: If the way mankind is has so much potential for love and goodness in a World of peace, then how come things are just getting worse. Do you think that a World War III will bring the kind of utopian World that you seem to be able to bring about better than God ever could ?

  • Ryan says:

    ” ‘God and Jesus Christ told us to love everybody, including your enemies.’ Whatever. Whether I love him or not, he’s a false prophet deserving of no respect and a great deal of mockery.” So you’re essentially saying that you don’t believe Them then, right ? You don’t believe it’s right what They said is the right way of doing things, the very same Ones whom without Them we wouldn’t even be talking about any of this ? You don’t believe Their ways are right ?

    “You obviously haven’t read my post from two weeks ago in which I responded to his ‘what-if’ challenge.” No, I haven’t, I’m going through to the most recent, so I’ll be getting there sometime very soon though.

    ” ‘He did continue in his advertising business and so he did make alot of money doing this, especially while in God’s Church.’ That’s absolutely true, but absolutely untrue in the sense you meant it. Herbie was successful at advertising his cobbled-together religion and sucking the money out of those foolish enough to believe it.” But what about what I presented though, regarding God’s tithings being used for doing God’s work, and if this work involves a commission to preach the gospel into all the World, would a dirt-poor nobody be able to accomplish this, or wouldn’t he need to be fairly wealthy to be able to travell all over this World throughout many years ?

    ” ‘but why would a lawyer’s statement about the the matter be all that you need to prove to yourself that he is guilty ?’ It wasn’t.” Didn’t you say that this lawyer’s statement is all that you needed because they would know better than to write something that could be slanderous ?

    “The fact that Armstrong didn’t sue the lawyer for making an accusation of such a vile act is quite telling.” Well, maybe not, because God’s people shouldn’t really be on the offensive like that, I mean, the legal challenge was over, and there would be no point in suing somebody when the legal accusation was over and done with. All this would have done would be to prove again whether or not Armstrong was guilty in order to show whether or not this lawyer was being slanderous, it would just be hear-say, and there would be no point in wasting his own time and the Church’s time with something that wasn’t important after the legal challenge was already decided upon. It’s not really telling that he didn’t sue, I mean why retaliate against something like this if you know you didn’t do it ? Since he was already innocent in the eyes of the courts, then if he was guilty he would have sued to try getting money out of it knowing that he wouldn’t be able to be convicted of the incest anymore, so not suing doesn’t really show much of anything other than not wanting to go through all of that turmoil for some bucks.

    “Whether or not Herbert Armstrong was guilty of incest is not the point. Herbie was guilty of being a false prophet. As is Ron Weinland.” Using this very same logic would point to Peter being a false prophet, or the number of ones whom said that Jesus Christ was coming to be King over them and deposing their Roman rulers, so I’m guess that you feel that all of them were false prophets also then ?

  • Ryan says:

    Mike: I’m only okay with a death-curse if it’s God’s will to do so. He can do what his scorners do to him, and so for the people that wish that Weinland would just wither away and self-destruct (mentally, which is from the inside), then Weinland has every authority by God to pronounce a death curse of the mind. It’s not nonsense about the mental death because just as you and everybody else knows, he stated death from the inside, so tell me how it was stated as a physical death, other than the separate parts where he does indeed state that you will physically die if there is no repentence on your part ? But anyhow, yes I’m okay with a death-curse over mocking because God’s Word says that His 2 witnesses and prophets would be doing this ? Did you not agree with God’s death-curse (through Elijah) upon those 100 – 200 false prophets, was this wrong also ? Regarding spiritual death, you might feel like you’re better than ever, but for what God was offering you through repentence, you rejected it and so your mind died to ever have the hopes in your current physical life to come out of your spiritual condition, regardless of how you feel in your own mind. Remember that God tells us that we don’t even know our own mind as human-beings, God knows so much more than any of us know.

    “so why doesn’t he? As a Witness he has the power, right. No, actually he has the duty, as a Witness, to establish his credentials so that people will listen to him.” The verses do not say that he has the duty, it says the power is given unto them to do those things as often as they will (which I’m sure will be as often as God wills because it’s all a matter of God’s will being accomplished). There could be great reason why those Witness powers aren’t used until much much later on because of what I stated before regarding that it’s not about performing miracles and then everybody flocking to them, maybe you missed this comment posting from before.

    “And he’d have to be specific about the nature of the event, exactly which day and and exactly where it happened.” Obviously it would have to be specific or it wouldn’t be shocking, lol. But yes, if it was very very specific just as you described that it would have to be, and it happened just as he would have stated, would you actually be able to swallow your prides enough to say he’s true and begin following him ?

    Let me clear up a misconception. People are not deserving of my respect unless and until they earn it. They’ll get my conditional civility until they either prove themselves to be deserving of respect or until they prove themselves deserving of my scorn, as has Weinland.” You are certainly entitled to however you want to feel, but as far as God and Jesus Christ are concerned, you aren’t in support of Them then because this goes very much against what you know they stand for. Do you not believe Them, or what ?

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    “Isn’t going through this 6,000 Years of evil worth what would last for eternity?” – Ryan.

    Nope. It totally isn’t. If I were God I wouldn’t have put humanity through all of this. All those innocent children murdered in the Children’s Crusade, all those kids God ordered to be killed because their parents weren’t Jews, they would have all been saved. According to the Bible, God ordered children to be slaughtered. Tell you what Ryan, YOU go ahead and believe a loving God kills children, and I’ll happily believe that the non-existent God of Abraham would be a tyrannical piece of excrement if he were real. And yes, we are certainly going to find out “what’s up” in the next year or so.

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    Ryan stated: “Let me ask you this Avalokiteshvara: If the way mankind is has so much potential for love and goodness in a World of peace, then how come things are just getting worse. Do you think that a World War III will bring the kind of utopian World that you seem to be able to bring about better than God ever could?”

    1. I don’t think WWIII will bring a Utopian world, and I never said we would.
    2. I don’t think Man has potential for that kind of love, and I never said we did.
    3. Ronald Weinland DID say there would be no US president in 2009. Wrong.
    4. RW said that Mike would die speedily from a physical curse. He didn’t.
    5. God ordered the Jews to kill children and take the wives of their enemies as their own. How good is THAT God?
    6. For the record I am a Soto Zen Buddhist who would never kill ANYONE, especially children. I AM a better God than Yahweh by that fact alone, among others. The God who said Thou Shalt Not Kill is the biggest killer in the universe, if he were real.

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    Ryan, I’m not going to respond to everything right at the moment because I have to work to earn the dollars that Weinland said weren’t going to be worth anything as far back as 2008.

    As far as what I believe or don’t believe, at one point you said that you knew it. Based on what? You haven’t really participated here on my blog so you wouldn’t know. You post a bunch here out of the blue, disappear for a number of weeks, then come back and post a bunch more as though you’re on some kind of manic phase. Have you posted here previously as Aaron Robinson?

    The part about my dying a spiritual death for not repenting is nonsense. Weinland’s core theology is the same as Armstrong’s, which I rejected over 4 decades ago. If a “spriritual death” resulted, it was long before Weinland started serving up his bologna sandwiches and Flavor Aid.

    Everything you post here is a regurgitation of Ron’s lame excuses. So it’s clear that what you believe is what Ron says because he said it. Exactly why do you believe that Ron is God’s prophet? Where do his credentials come from? And what sets him apart from every other Armstrongite minister, other than being more looneytunes than most of the others?

    What is the proof of Ron? Certainly not the criteria he set forth in his book.

  • Jack says:

    Ryan said Ron “said that he wasn’t speaking presumptuously because the Church had long believed in Christ on Trumpets”

    A prophet gets his orders from God, NOT the Church. Perhaps the “church” has a different meaning for the word prophet.

    I’d also like to repeat Mike’s question: “give me one good reason that you believe Weinland is a prophet of God. Besides him saying that he is.” You have posted fifteen comments since Mike asked that question.

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    Exactly, Ryan. Let’s get to the bottom line, enough of the regurgitation of Ron’s lame excuses for timeline changes and lack of fulfilled prophecy.

    Let’s get to the bottom line. Weinland has made extraordinary claims. Extraordinary claims which require extraordinary evidence. Exactly why do you believe he’s a prophet of God? And none of that truth-of-the-sabbath or truth-of-6000-year-plan-of-God nonsense. Nonsense which we won’t debate here, and nonsense which was espoused long before Weinland came along.

    Why do you believe Weinland?

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    And while we’re at it…how do you justify 6000 years of evil being worth an eternity of goodness?

  • Disappointed says:

    Ryan,
    “I know Weinland said that he would call himself a false prophet and would quit ministering, but isn’t it possible that he said those things because he felt very sure in his faith of what God’s Church had always believed about Christ returning on Trumpets ? Why wouldn’t you expect God’s prophet to use what is believed to be the truth in the Church, especially having gone uncorrected about it for such a long time, to give a timeline based upon what the Church had long believed ? Don’t you think that if he used anything else that this would have been wrong and would have gone outside of the faith of the Church ? It doesn’t matter that he got the timing wrong, even if it stated that he would be a false prophet if the timing was wrong, because he didn’t anticipate that God would be correcting long-held knowledge in the Church, and only God had the power to know this in advance, Weinland was putting everything on the line based upon belief that God never corrected.”

    I would expect God’s prophet to use what God told him, not what a church believed. You ask if he had used anything else, wouldn’t it be wrong and gone outside the faith of the church. No. If God had given him the true timeline, it wouldn’t have been wrong. Who cares about the church’s “faith?” You already admitted the church is wrong about things and needs correction (i.e. medical healing). So why would God need his prophet to put out erroneous information and then correct him? Better yet, why would God allow his prophet to do this?

    “I can just about guarantee you that if any of God’s prophets or apostles had seen that the Church long believed that Christ would return on Trumpets, and knowing that 2008 was the juncture point of the timing, they would have given just as Weinland gave, because they can only be judged on what God gave them to see, and if God never gave them to see that Christ returning on Trumpets was not accurate, then they can’t be judged according to something that went uncorrected because it wasn’t God’s purpose to reveal the timing just yet.”

    You seem to be confusing some requirements to be called a prophet. God tells His prophets what to say. He doesn’t NOT tell His prophets what NOT to say. A prophet who speaks a word that God did not give him is a false prophet. That prophet can not say that God didn’t tell him it wasn’t okay to say that, so it must be alright and that’s how he’ll be judged. If you prophecy, you say exactly what God told you to say or you keep your mouth shut.

    “Weinland admitted that he was wrong about the timing of events, he admitted this straight-up, but he also said that he wasn’t speaking presumptuously because the Church had long believed in Christ on Trumpets, so to use ANYTHING ELSE to give a timeline would have been presumptuous, but not if what was used was Church doctrine that went uncorrected for so long.” Now, if that belief did not exist in the Church, then he would have been VERY presumptuous and would have had to have repented like BIG-TIME.”

    ANYTHING ELSE…like God’s true word? Fail.

    “Now, if that belief did not exist in the Church, then he would have been VERY presumptuous and would have had to have repented like BIG-TIME.”

    My church believes Ron is not God’s prophet. If he turned out to be God’s prophet, wouldn’t I have to repent “like BIG-TIME?” So just because Ron’s church had a certain belief that turned out to be wrong, why doesn’t he have to repent, especially considering he is the church’s leader?

    “Lying means intentfull deceit. Let’s just say that Weinland is a true prophet of God. Would stating that he would end his ministry because he had full confidence and faith in what the Church had believed (uncorrected), was this intending to lie because he stated something out of faith. The only way he would be a liar is if he KNEW that nothing would occur but yet stated things anyhow, then he would have been intending to lie. Discovering that the timing was not correct does not make him a liar to continue preaching, but he had to humble himself to see that the timing was wrong and to accept correction from God. Any of the people from Biblical times would have done the very same thing if they had full faith in God’s Church.”

    Lying is also telling a false statement. Once the events did not happen and he continued preaching, he willfully acted in a manner that contradicted what he said he would do. Jesus tells us to let our ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’ and our ‘No,’ ‘No.’ He tells us not to swear by anything, but have personal integrity so that others can definitively take us at our word. Again, if God was truly directing Ron, He wouldn’t have let him falsely prophecy and then have to change it.

    Why do you say Peter would be considered a false prophet? And as for “the number of ones whom said that Jesus Christ was coming to be King over them and deposing their Roman rulers,” why do you think this was false? Your leader likes to spiritualize everything, why doesn’t he apply that spiritualization here and recognize they didn’t give false information. Just as Jesus said he would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, He was not referring to the physical structure. Ron cannot point to other’s “being wrong” in the Bible as proof that he should still be considered a prophet even though he was wrong. They weren’t wrong, but he is.

  • Kirrily Xpkg says:

    Ryan,

    Ron told us at the time, that God himself gave him the FIRST timeline. He spoke at length about God having to give it, that no one could figure it out for themselves. Ron went on to tell us back then, that it was a hobby of his to work out dates, to see what fit etc. But in the end, no man could work it out – it had to be given.

    And so it was, that God himself, GAVE the timing to Jesus, and Jesus gave the timing, the FIRST timeline to Ron.

    Ron NEVER said that any of it was based on his or the churches understanding.

    Of course, when nothing happened April 17, 2008 – all that changed.

    After a few weeks of Ronnie still holding onto the first timeline (45-90 days now leeway for first trumpet from 17 April 2008, then after a while we were told the first trumpet HAD happend, green money destroyed) – he then heard about another COG splinter coming up with what we now have as the second timeline.

    Wayne Matthews warned us at the time about this other COG splinter (who has since, long ago, denounced this second timeline (it was worked out by him, not given by God, he was straight up about that). Mike here also stated the second timeline BEFORE Ronnie did.

    So now after all this, Ronnie then turns around and suddenly starts saying that working out dates is not rocket science. Suddenly it’s no biggie that others came up with it first. What happened to God having to give it? That no man could come up with it themselves?

    Oh yeah, that’s right – Ronnie changes everything. This is just one of many, many things he changed.

    Why not read his book again Ryan, I dare you 🙂

  • moremercy says:

    Father, forgive these people who mock and ridicule your saints and prophets, and your passover. For they DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING! They are arrogant and spoiled children who hate your ways and hate the love and mercy you have extended to them and their families because of the prayers for mercy for them to repent. Seperate the sheep from the pigs and lead them where you will. For that which is clean, can not be mingled with the unclean. For it becomes unclean as well.

  • Avalokiteshvara says:

    Universe, uplift and embolden these people who have the courage to think for themselves and hold Scripture to the ideals it espouses. And if Scripture fails to uphold what it demands of others, then let these brave beautiful people discard them for themselves and for the benefit of the poor and weak who fear mortality and mystery. They are seeking and confused, and need to know that their opinions and feelings count no matter how different they are from what others think and feel. Give them the strength to challenge evil, and bring them to the knowledge of their limits where true love and humility lies. Let them see the value of Life itself, and the completeness of being a human being in Reality.

    And on a personal note, “moremercy”: I personally know EXACTLY what I am doing, and I don’t hate what doesn’t exist (your God). What I hate are people like you who think you need to petition (fake) God on my behalf. And speaking of arrogant, you could just forgive us in private. No need to make it public. Your pronouncement of your prayer is exactly what CHRIST hated in the actions of the Pharisees. Notice how we don’t mock the Dalai Lama? Because he ISN’T a hypocrite. We don’t mock the Pope. Because he is at least trying to do something relatively good for people. No mockery of Mother Theresa, because she PRACTICED what she believed. I believe NONE of them are correct about their theology, but I wouldn’t mock them becuase they are/were trying to uplift humanity. Ron is calling for the DESTRUCTION of humanity, cursing Mike (DDTFA) to die, and changing his theology every couple of months to fit HIS circumstances.

    I can think of no better service to humanity or whatever God might be out there by warning others of false prophets and snakes like RONALD WEINLAND.

  • Kirrily Xpkg says:

    More mercy… You should take a good hard, long look at the reason as to why you posted what you did. We here all know the reason, but do you?

  • Mike (DDTFA) says:

    I believe that “moremercy” has also commented here as “helpingusoon”. Zach showed no mercy to Weinland’s critics on this blog back in May of last year.

  • Kirrily Xpkg says:

    Ah Ok, that makes sense. Seems a lot of PKG supporters would be getting angry that nothing is happening, then taking it out on us. I suppose we may see more and more of this as time moves closer and closer to Jesus’ non return.