- Topic
One interesting fact seems to be noticeable from the record. This god and Hwang apparently had their first child 10 years before their marriage. Wonder if there is a commandment against that. 🙂
Correct me if I have read the report wrong.
Yup Emil I noticed the same thing. Not sure if marriages were immediately reported back then but either way I think the important thing is that he had a family and had 3 more children AFTER he was baptized. When I was a member I was told that ASH did not live a WORLDLY life and that his mission was to restore the passover and fulfill prophecy. All this blah blah blah about him suffering and starving for 37 years appears to be a bunch of BS to make members feel guilty and willing to sacrifice anything to satisfy the organization's demands. I guess it worked on me for a limited time period…
Bottom line: ASH was just a man who, except for starting his own SDA splinter group, lived a pretty normal life.
^ You could give it that much latitude but I do believe that there is a difference in the way an event is recorded as reported and when it took place. For the marriage date, the words are "Report of marriage to HWANG, WONSOON on 15.04.1958." So the date must refer to the marriage rather than the report.
On the other hand, when the event is reported subsequently, the phrasing clearly brings that out. For instance, "Report of birth made by father on 15.04.1958" is the sentence used for the birth of each of the 3 children who were born before 15.04.1958. Here the date clearly refers to the report rather than the birth which is confirmed by the fact that the same doc specifies a different date of birth.
Looking at this difference in phrasing, it seems highly likely that they registered their marriage after the first 3 children were born. It is possible that they were married in a religious ceremony long before that but the legal marriage date seems to be 15.04.1958. Moreover, Ahn was baptised in 1948. Not sure of the date. His first child appears to have been born in May 1948. If he was married before that, it could not be in a Christian marriage. So is the Buddhist marriage, if there was one, acceptable for him to go on and produce more children after being baptised? Just asking. All looks like one huge mess.
emil wrote:
One interesting fact seems to be noticeable from the record. This god and Hwang apparently had their first child 10 years before their marriage. Wonder if there is a commandment against that. 🙂
Correct me if I have read the report wrong.
This is just slander*.
Oh, and stay off the internet; its bad.
*actually, its libel, but its easier to say "slander".
Actually there is no commandment against it technically
Many people tried to refuse Jesus because of his physical family as well.
Many people who perhaps share in your misinterpretations (both biblical and practical; if not outright fabrications), also tried to condemn Jesus as a sinner for whom it was impossible to be God.
Wordly-minded-people argue about worldly things. But we see with the eyes of prophecy, all thanks to Father and Mother for opening my eyes to prophecy.
It is so funny and hypocritical that how conveniently you could use Jesus to justify your reasoning. Yet, you are forbidden to pray in the name of Jesus.
It is also hilarious how you guys are being taught to compare yourselves with apostles and your gods with Jesus. They were dying everyday-not metaphorly but also literally- and being persecuted. I hope that you all would learn to make a distinction of persecution vs being scrutinized
Fyi, your gods have nothing similar with Jesus Christ. His teachings will echo in eternity. On the other hand, your complacent teachings will soon die along with your false gods…
As to your claim with "fabricated" truth, it is totally up to you if you wish to ignore obvious evidences. Please keep in mind, ignoring comes from ignorance. I hope you will wise up and start using your God given brain to realize that your cannibalized versus will never ever support your never-coming-true prophesies.
Remember; LOOKING AND SEEING ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
144000 wrote:
Many people tried to refuse Jesus because of his physical family as well.
Your church regularly uses this to compare Jesus with Sahnghong. This is a patently inappropriate comparison. They had no way of knowing at the time that Jesus was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit. They would have wrongly thought he was an illegitimate child conceived outside of marriage. They mistakenly thought he was born in Nazareth rather than Bethlehem, which was the place prophesied. Nathanael is an example of this. There was no actual wrongdoing on Jesus' part unless you count his failure to keep the Sabbath as per OT laws. But then he died publicly on the cross as prophesied and rose again as prophesied.
How about Sahnghong? He was not just a perceived sinner but an actual one. He lied. Seeing the registration records, he quite likely fathered children before he actually married. He worshipped an idol. He married another woman while still being married to his legal wife. From his words addressed to Umm Sooin in his infamous book, it is also entirely likely he had a relationship with her. He died and was buried and stays there.
No comparison at all
144000 wrote:
Many people who perhaps share in your misinterpretations (both biblical and practical; if not outright fabrications), also tried to condemn Jesus as a sinner for whom it was impossible to be God.
True but as stated above, unlike Sahnghong, he wasn't a sinner.
144000 wrote:
Wordly-minded-people argue about worldly things. But we see with the eyes of prophecy, all thanks to Father and Mother for opening my eyes to prophecy.
Twisted prophecy is all I see. I urge you to start threads here on each prophecy or bump up older threads and lets see how they hold up.
Meanwhile chew on this one.
1 John 4:13-16:
13 This is how we know that we live in him and he in us: He has given us of his Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God. 16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.
Why is John writing as if the Father and Son are 2 different beings? Could it be that the bible is right and the WMSCOG is wrong?
"They had no way of knowing"
"They would have wrongly thought "
"They mistakenly thought "
"[Ahnsahnghong was] quite likely … not just a perceived sinner but an actual one" ~Summarizing Emil
This website is FULL of the words "i think" and "maybe" and "they probably" or "quite likely" or "I assume" or "don't you think thats strange?" or "they should tell us the truth about why they do things this way [because we ourselves don't know it]" and all manner of similes in between.
I'm seeing a pattern here, and its one thats been repeated before on this site. Half of the evidence postured here includes the caveat "if you accept our assumption about its origin and meaning". And the other half has been downright proven to be manipulated by liars or blatantly fabricated by some of the membership.
You try SO hard ALL THE TIME to find some way to destroy our faith, and you fail over and over again. The lies are exposed over and over again, you contradict each other, your witnesses contradict each other. Failure after failure testifies against you, reavealing your true nature, and the nature of your new claim as well.
All you readers, come to Zion, do not believe their examples but learn from them their divisive nature.
"as if the Father and Son are 2 different beings"
You try to testify against us, but you will find yourself also at odds with anyone ever who has learned the truth of the divine nature of the Trinity; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, being one God.
If anyone wants to learn this we can study at Zion how the bible clearly states over and over and over again that Jehovah himself is the one who comes, and how Jesus himself is the alpha and omega and how Jehova is the one to come in the last days, and how Jesus also says that he is the one to come in the last days, and how he will come with a New Name. All three are one in the same person and the same promise.
For anyone who already believes in the Holy Trinity, for the sake of brevity you can understand that unstable people who reject the divinity of Jesus who is God cannot be trusted to interpret the prophecies for you.
144000 wrote:
and how Jesus also says that he is the one to come in the last days, and how he will come with a New Name.
What's the new name? AhnSahngHong? Oh, wait, let's ask THE BIBLE! ^^
REV 19:12 He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself.
He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.
So it's not an actual worldly name? Fascinating… If only you were to read the verses in context like God intended ^^
You, my friend, continue to spew empty words, but you are yet to give us scriptural backup.
" name written on him that no one knows but he himself"
The bible testifies against what you just said. For if the name was "Word of God" then God would be a liar to speak "no one knows but he himself" to the early church disciples.
But the new name which God promises he himself only knows, he also promises to reveal to the saints in the last days. Not circa 100-200ad when the gospels were written with the title "Word of God", but the last days.
144k, can you address some of the issues in the article that this post pertains to?
After reviewing the records, do you think that ASH had children prior to being married?
I am not saying that ASH having a family proves that he isn't god. But why did the wms change their story? I heard over and over that he didn't have a family.
I was told that children get in the way of preaching the gospel. If members are to follow ASH's example, and he had a wife and 4 children, why was I told otherwise? It doesn't seem like the children got in ASH's way.
Why was I told that ASH starved and suffered when the evidence shows him looking healthy having a good time? There was never any time to go to the beach when I was a member due to all of the church activities that I was expected to participate in. Conservative clothing was encouraged when I was a member, yet ASH is seen swimming around with a bare chest.
Wondering what your take on all of this is?
My take on it is that you and a few others were severely misunderstood. I heard "he must be the king david" I heard "he must rebuild zion" and I never asked about his physical family. And when I did hear about his physical family we were told "we focus on prophecy and fulfillment" Nobody I know ever denied his physical family like you are suggesting, and everybody in the WMSCOG knows that same truth.
Don't you think its peculiar that all of us aren't always gossiping amongst ourselves about how strange and contradictory all theese rumors are? Don't you think if you had compelling things to say that all of us would be abandoning this faith in droves? "Oh yes, I heard about what happened to Steve and I'm experienceing the same thing, Examining was telling the truth we got to get out of here!" Why do you think that never actually happens? Because the stories of "we were told this and that" you make up are just that, stories. Isolated incidents so far removed from reality that their mere existance is questionable, let alone be it comparable to our whole faith.
Don't you know that many of your so called "Examples" are readily handed to new believers simply because of how ludicrous they are? Your false testimonies are actually used to help instill faith in brothers and sisters because even at a glance it is so laughably ridiculous that it helps us explain some sermons.
This websites failure to incite us to question our faith speaks volumes about how few and delusional your stories are. Your opinions are not indicative of the faith as a whole. Your stories are not rooted in widespread truth. They are secular misunderstandings and everybody knows it.
Why then do members from across generations new, old, and in-between, not point out the contradictions that are so painfully obvious according to you? Contradictions that all of them should have witnessed firsthand? Simple. Theese controversies never actually happened.
The only people who you can possibly fool are newcomers who don't know the church history, which is the only real reason why I bother posting here.
144000-aka-spin doctor- You conveniently ignore true life experiences as “isolated incidents”. You could spoon-feed our “false” testimonies with your own interpretations to solidify faith in “brothers” and “sisters” whom you would be hastily booted out in case of a disagreement. Remember; looking and seeing are two different things… You could say false this, lie that, but truth is the truth. You cannot deny forever.
I also notice that rather than giving direct answer to questions, you would shift subjects to your direction along with bogus allegations. Isn’t it the way of WMSCOG dealing with unwanted questions? Why don’t you let members do their homework and exercise their free will to be judge of what is true what is not? Be impartial and watch your youtube videos. Don’t they sound like a replica as if they were given a script and being orchestrated from the same source?
I hope you realize that having believed in human gods will not immune you from hellfire. As my friend said before; “Pursue the truth for the truth which will set you free at last”…
144000 wrote:
My take on it is that you and a few others were severely misunderstood. I heard "he must be the king david" I heard "he must rebuild zion" and I never asked about his physical family. And when I did hear about his physical family we were told "we focus on prophecy and fulfillment" Nobody I know ever denied his physical family like you are suggesting, and everybody in the WMSCOG knows that same truth.
I did not severly misunderstand. I was clearly told that ASH did not have children….by more than one person/leader. Of course you were told to "focus on prophecy and fulfillment". That would be a thought stopping technique to divert your focus elsewhere if you started to have questions similar to those raised by those outside of the WMS bubble.
144000 wrote:
Don't you think its peculiar that all of us aren't always gossiping amongst ourselves about how strange and contradictory all theese rumors are?
No I don't think it's "peculiar" because I know that members are encouraged to report doubts that others are having to someone higher up so that they can be dealt with. Voicing concerns or questions about the leader, in this case ASH, is discouraged. Don't you know that "Doubt Is A Sign Of Little Faith?"
144000 wrote:
Don't you think if you had compelling things to say that all of us would be abandoning this faith in droves? "Oh yes, I heard about what happened to Steve and I'm experienceing the same thing, Examining was telling the truth we got to get out of here!" Why do you think that never actually happens? Because the stories of "we were told this and that" you make up are just that, stories. Isolated incidents so far removed from reality that their mere existance is questionable, let alone be it comparable to our whole faith.
People have left the WMS because the information on this site has only confirmed what they already knew before they ever even looked at the site…that something was severly wrong with the WMS. Whether it was how they were treated, the behavior they observed, questions about the doctrine not adding up, etc. I am not making up stories 144000 and the members who read this and convince themselves that I am are only fooling themselves. I am not saying that it is not right to disagree or have a different experience, but members have to be honest with themselves at some point. If what I (or any other former member) say is similar to what they have experienced, they will have to acknowledge it, even if they acknowledge it quietly.
144000 wrote:
Don't you know that many of your so called "Examples" are readily handed to new believers simply because of how ludicrous they are? Your false testimonies are actually used to help instill faith in brothers and sisters because even at a glance it is so laughably ridiculous that it helps us explain some sermons.
Yeah that's called damage control. You have to get to them first with some BS explanation or excuse that they can then use to ease the cognitive dissonance they may experience if they by chance come upon the information by some other means. Are you calling me a liar 144000 when you accuse me of "false testimonies"? I am not lying nor do I believe in a righteous lie. Do you? Are you going to say that you were never taught that it was ok to lie (this includes omissions) when defending the WMS?
144000 wrote:
This websites failure to incite us to question our faith speaks volumes about how few and delusional your stories are. Your opinions are not indicative of the faith as a whole. Your stories are not rooted in widespread truth. They are secular misunderstandings and everybody knows it.
I am going to venture out on a limb and say that you are not qualified to call anyone delusional so watch what you say. "Secular misunderstandings"? That's quite an understatement. Best one this year so far.
144000 wrote:
Why then do members from across generations new, old, and in-between, not point out the contradictions that are so painfully obvious according to you? Contradictions that all of them should have witnessed firsthand? Simple. Theese controversies never actually happened.
Members do point out the contradictions, they have experienced them, and that's what makes them former members. Simple.
144000 wrote:
The only people who you can possibly fool are newcomers who don't know the church history, which is the only real reason why I bother posting here.
You know as well as I do that long term members have left because they considered the evidence presented to them and decided on their own that the contradictions were too many for the WMS to be the "truth" as you call it.
Did you get special permission from your local WMS leader to post here? Everyone knows that members are told not to read criticism on the internet. "If you eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil you will surely die". That must mean that you are one of "strong faith". No one stays in a cult forever 144000. There is hope for you too.
Well answered Emily. I hope 144 really does look closely at what you said. Everybody deserves a chance to be happy and live their life freely.
144000 wrote:
"They had no way of knowing"
"They would have wrongly thought "
"They mistakenly thought "
"[Ahnsahnghong was] quite likely … not just a perceived sinner but an actual one" ~Summarizing Emil
This website is FULL of the words "i think" and "maybe" and "they probably" or "quite likely" or "I assume" or "don't you think thats strange?" or "they should tell us the truth about why they do things this way [because we ourselves don't know it]" and all manner of similes in between.
I'm seeing a pattern here, and its one thats been repeated before on this site. Half of the evidence postured here includes the caveat "if you accept our assumption about its origin and meaning". And the other half has been downright proven to be manipulated by liars or blatantly fabricated by some of the membership.
You try SO hard ALL THE TIME to find some way to destroy our faith, and you fail over and over again. The lies are exposed over and over again, you contradict each other, your witnesses contradict each other. Failure after failure testifies against you, reavealing your true nature, and the nature of your new claim as well.
All you readers, come to Zion, do not believe their examples but learn from them their divisive nature.
Apparently you are seeing a pattern of persecution as you always do. What has my post said? You say that Jesus was refused because of his physical family. My comment shows that people refused him because they did not know he fulfilled prophecy. They thought he was born in Nazareth rather than Bethlehem. You collected a group of phrases to discredit my comment but you haven't addressed the point itself.
Regarding Sahnghong, I never wrote that which your comment implies:
"[Ahnsahnghong was] quite likely … not just a perceived sinner but an actual one" ~Summarizing Emil
The "quite likely" part is specific to just one point. There are others that are unambiguous like his worshiping an idol as a Buddhist, his lying, his bigamous marriage but you choose to ignore. Looks like you are not just shifting goalposts but drawing a veil over the playground to selectively display what you choose.
If you dare, try to dispute the points rather than taking selective phrases or rearranging my comment to make it look stupid.
Here are my points:
Your post compared the treatment of Jesus by his contemporaries to the treatment of Sahnghong. This is inappropriate because –
1. the only sins Jesus was accused of was a) blasphemy for claiming to be God when he actually was and b)not keeping the sabbath correctly
2. Sahnghong sinned when he worshipped as a Buddhist, he lied about heavenly mother in the New Jerusalem book and he took a second wife while his first was still living.
144000 wrote:
"as if the Father and Son are 2 different beings"
You try to testify against us, but you will find yourself also at odds with anyone ever who has learned the truth of the divine nature of the Trinity; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, being one God.
If anyone wants to learn this we can study at Zion how the bible clearly states over and over and over again that Jehovah himself is the one who comes, and how Jesus himself is the alpha and omega and how Jehova is the one to come in the last days, and how Jesus also says that he is the one to come in the last days, and how he will come with a New Name. All three are one in the same person and the same promise.
For anyone who already believes in the Holy Trinity, for the sake of brevity you can understand that unstable people who reject the divinity of Jesus who is God cannot be trusted to interpret the prophecies for you.
The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit are 3 persons in one God. 3 separate persons get it?
This is what the bible testifies from Genesis to Revelation. I gave you an example which you have not refuted but side-tracked.
How about the baptism of Jesus as written in the 3 synoptic gospels? Jesus is standing there in the Jordan. The Holy Spirit descends on him in the form of a dove. The voice of the Father is heard testifying that Jesus is his Son. John the baptist elsewhere testifies that the one who sent him had told him that the messiah was the one on whom he would see the Spirit descend.
We see a similar situation at the Transfiguration as well. We see Jesus praying to the Father in the gospels. Isaiah 61 speaks of the Spirit being upon Jesus and this is repeated when Jesus reads from the scroll in Luke 4. There are numerous scriptural proofs that the Trinity is 3 persons who exist simultaneously and eternally. The letters of John repeatedly speak about the Father and Son as two separate persons. I will give you a whole list if you wish. But first explain the baptism scene in the context of your interpretation.
Aside from making a vague claim of it being a single person, you fail to provide a single concrete reference. You guys use a single verse where Jehovah says he is the one who saves but that does not mean what you claim it does. It would be true when the Father sent His Son to redeem us as well.
omer "I also notice that rather than giving direct answer to questions, you would shift subjects to your direction along with bogus allegations."
Obviously you haven't been here very long, and for any new readers, you may notice in the archives I and others have adressed several of theese points very directly in the past. If the explanation wasn't good enough for you then, too bad. I'm not going to re-hash it just because you find it an excuse to say "oh see look, he is running away!" hoping in the most juvenile sense that the people who see it now are misinformed enough not to notice this is the hundredth time you people say such a thing.
Its a running gag among this forum. You raise a point, have it debated, then derail or shift the goalposts, and then when somebody says they're done talking you accuse them of running away. Read the archives, you guys do this every time, and your doing it again now instead of defending the testimonies which I challenged.
Allow me to sum up everything else with this:
"Members do point out the contradictions, they have experienced them, and that's what makes them former members. Simple."
Actually if you pay attention to attendance records, and group activity, most people leave because they have other things they enjoy doing and don't want to make time for God, and say things like "its too difficult" then "maybe next time" and finally "look stop bugging me about it" then they are history.
Your giving yourself too much credit for this websites "evidence findings". In fact. More people stay after questioning what you people advertise here, than those who didn't see it. More long-term members (who have "seen" the things you "claim") stay, than do the short-term members, in addition to that.
So no, your own boast speaks against you.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.