Hirelings or shepherds, which?

While I was at Mizpah preparing for Pentecost, on AW blog, I was being reviled by Dennis and Kscribe, in particular, for explaining what the bible teaches about pretended ministers, who are actually hirelings.

Well, I didn't invent the term hireling, it was Jesus. Note what he says: "But he that is a hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep and flees: and the wolf catches them, and scatters the sheep"(John 10:12). Where are the sheep today, if not scattered, and have become prey for discredited men who have started their own churches? And why have the sheep been scattered? The answer should be obvious to anyone who has not been struck by supernatural blindness. It is because those who were once called ministers were actually hirelings. Again, note what Jesus, not Tom Mahon, says: "the hireling flees, because he is a hireling, and cares not for the sheep"(John 10:13). By definition, the hireling works for money. So when things get difficult in one job, the hireling runs away and finds a new employer. On the other hand, the shepherd sees his calling as a vocation, and is willing to work for nothing on earth because the glory of the Lord is his reward.

Now let us contrast the behaviour of a hireling with that of a shepherd thus: "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd gives his life for the sheep"(John 10:11). The hireling runs away, but the shepherd is willing to die for the sheep. That is what Jesus teaches, and I agree with him. And note what John was also inspired to write: "Hereby we perceive the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we OUGHT to lay down our lives for the brethren"(1 John 3:16). The term ought denotes the duty that love demands from those who claim to possess the nature and character of Christ, who is the good shepherd.

In addition, Paul's admonition to the ministry was this: "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Spirit have made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he has purchased with his own blood"(Acts 20:28). But instead of WCG ministry feeding the church, they fed themselves and took a financial package from Mr. Tkach to betray the flock. How despicable can people be? But I shudder to think of the consequences of their treachery!

To be continued as I am very busy...

Psychological babble.

A former hireling by the name of Dennis Diehl, who by stealth climbed up some other way instead of coming through the door, which is Christ, was mistakenly ordained a minister in WCG. Sadly, he never understood or possessed the character of a true minister. In Paul's second Pastoral Epistle to the Corinthians, he reminded the ministry that God is the one who enables them to be ministers thus: "our sufficiency is of God; who also has made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit"(2 Cor. 3:5-6). The word "able" means that they have the knowledge and character to hold such an exalted office, and are capable of teaching the things of the spirit, as their "sufficiency is of God."

Paul then proceeded to outlined four fundamental character traits to be found in true ministers of Christ thus: "Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; but (1) have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, (2) not walking in craftiness, (3) nor handling the word of God deceitfully, (4) but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God"(2 Cor. 4:1-2).

Well, did Dennis or any of the other hirelings that were "ministers" in WCG, ever "renounced the hidden things of dishonesty?" They spent a lot of time denouncing dishonesty in other people, but as for "renouncing" it in themselves, NEVER! If the widespread merchandising of the deluded people in cog-land is anything to go by, then, dishonesty is the order of the day.

What about "not walking in craftiness?" Anyone who was around the ministry in WCG or in cog-land today could write a book on the "craftiness" of most ministers, including their deceitful misrepresentation of the word of God and their lying to the brethren, either by commission or omission. Their motto was and is, "We reveal things on a need to know basis, and we decide who needs to know." What deceitfulness!

Dennis is now an expert in psychological babble. So his analysis of my exposure of Gavin's 17 pages of drivel, on what Gavin thinks is an intellectual exposition of the authorship of the Pastoral Epistles, is described as "pain body." I suppose when one falls from grace any nonsense appears attractive and alluring.

To be continued

The Pastoral Epistles?

One of the leading scoffers at AW blog has published 17 pages of incoherent nonsense, claiming it is an extract from a 3000 word essay on the Pastoral Epistles of first and second Timothy and Titus. He referenced a long list of so-called scholars, who disagree or are unsure of the date the epistles were written, the author of them or whether the prose is that of the Apostle Paul, or some other unknown author. He no doubt cites these erudite scholars because he presumes or thinks that they are qualified to comment on the veracity of the scriptures. Then again, their names may have been on a university designated reading list, where the dumb sheep are led to be sacrificed on the altar of ignorance.

Well, AW's leading scoffer will be surprised to learn that all the epistles in the NT are pastoral epistles, as they were all written and sent to ministers of the various church congregations, then extant in Greece and Asia. And that the singling out of Timothy and Titus as pastoral epistles, was done by grubby scholars, who were and are hostile to the revelation given to Paul, as it undermines their conception of Christianity as an attack on Judaism.

The internal Evidence

A careful and impartial reading of of the epistles to Timothy and Titus will show that they could not have been written by any other person but Paul. In the opening salutation to first Timothy, the writer addressed him as, "my own son in the faith." This is because Timothy was taught and ordained by Paul. And just before Paul's death, Timothy was appointed as Paul's successor(11 Tim. 4:1-3).

Paul first met Timothy at Lystra, during his second missionary journey. He choose Timothy to travel with him in preaching the gospel(Acts16:1-3).

to be continued...

Much Ado About Nothing!

Predicting the end of the world on a specific date makes one an easy target for ridicule, as Ron Wieland has painfully discovered. But predicting the end of the world is not new, for since the beginning of the Christian era, over zealous, misguided people have been predicting the end of the world. Ron Wieland is just another addition to the clan, and there will be many more before the world actually ends. As a consequent of Ron's failed predictions, the regular posters at AW Blog, including its erudite host, who fancies himself as a budding scholar, have been fulminating against the deranged predictions of Ron Wieland, a former WCG minister.

However, the people who tend to be leading the pack in pouring scorn on false prophets are usually completely ignorant of the teachings of the bible. They tend to argue that because all previous predictions have failed to come to pass, there are no end time prophecies in the bible. One is tempted to call their conclusion a failure of logic, but that would be to credit them with a logically mind, instead of being afflicted with supernatural blindness.

Still, God's former servant, Herbert W. Armstrong, who outlined many end time prophecies, which are currently being fulfilled and can be seen by those whose eyes are opened, has also been derided by the cabal of scoffers at Ambassador Watch Blog. Yet Mr. Armstrong's explanation of the end time prophecy of the breaking of the pride of America's and Britain's power is currently being fulfilled in Iraq and Afghanistan. For the past five years, a ragtag, ill equipped "army," without access to satellite technology, helicopter gunships, tanks, strike aircraft, stealth bombers or guided bombs, has remained undefeated by the world's greatest super power! If the fiasco in Iraq and Afghanistan is not the breaking of the pride of the America's and Britain's power, then, I don't know what is or will be the breaking of it!

But the bloggers at AW are too blind to focus on the reality of what is happening under their noses. They prefer to poke fun at Ron Wieland, which methinks is much ado about nothing!

False compassion

Modern religious sentimentality has been heavily influenced by the resurgence of social and psychological theories, which were fashionable in the 1950s. Simply put, these theories state that we must focus on the good in in human nature, and that people's deviant behaviour derives from their social and psychological background. Therefore, they are not solely responsible for their misdemeanors.

As a consequence, punishment for criminal behaviour should either be suspended or be used in conjunction with methods of rehabilitation. So when dealing with criminal behaviour, the emphasis should be on forgiveness, compassion and mercy. At the same time helping the guilty to understand and come to terms with the social and psychological factors that caused them to be any thing from petty criminals to malevolent psychopaths. And, of course, in this process very little thought is given to the victims.

This mindset is very evident among the so-called churches of God, but it s not to be found in the pages of the bible. Most in the churches of God, continue to makes excuses for the behaviour of the hirelings who have sought to divide God's church, or fed themselves instead of the flock. The flock is supposed to understand the social and psychological factors that caused the hirelings to abandon them. The flock is expected to forgive, show compassion and extend mercy to those who lied to them and betrayed them for money!

At the same time, the pain and suffering of the flock are to be seen by them as God's way of testing their faith. Well, this mindset is pure religious sentimentality, and is a product of the "spirit of the world."

On the other hand, the mindset of the bible is that people are responsible for their actions, whether good or bad. And although God is love, he is also a God of justice: and he does not give any consideration to the social and psychological factors that influence those who break his laws. On the contrary, the history of Israel, which was written for our learning, is replete with examples of God's attitude towards those who ignored his warnings and repeatedly broke his laws.

So to emphasise God's mercy to the exclusion of his justice, is to lull people into a false sense of security. A careful study of the teachings of Paul will show that he was very careful to warn the ministry and the churches to "walk worthy of the vocation with which they were called." So those hirelings who betrayed God's people for filthy lucre, will suffer the wrath of God, whatever the social or psychological factors that influenced their treachery!