Monday, July 8, 2013

Herbert W. Armstrong's Makeup Ban was Merely a Tool to Purge WCG Members

Banned by HWA has a post up about some Armstrongites still arguing over makeup and continuing to preach HWA's makeup ban.

I personally heard Roderick Meredith himself, in one of sermons online, say that HWA banned makeup because he saw his daughter Beverly wearing too much makeup one day in the 1950s and that is why he banned makeup.

Also HWA went back and forth on this issue. The Painful Truth has a very good article on this, That Darned Makeup Doctrine, which exposes why HWA's WCG decided to relax its attitude to makeup at one point.

To say that a common thing like makeup is wrong is simply a cheap way to assert one's spiritual superiority over others. How vain is that?

"Look at me," one of these men might say. "I am so holy and righteous I even hate makeup. If you want to be anywhere near as spiritual as me you need to hate makeup too."

How is that attitude not vain?

As one Anonymous commenter put it sarcastically:
Taking a bath or shower is trying to make one prettier than you are in real life. Do not under any circumstance use deodorant or brush you teeth. Crest or Colgate did not exist during the time of the apostles. Infidels.
So what is really going on here?

If one denies himself makeup he can pretend to be more spiritual than those who do not. If one can deny himself makeup because he is so spiritual, then surely he is worthy of being followed, the thinking goes.

This makeup ban was simply a way for HWA to claim to be more spiritual than most people and have the right to rule.

HWA is quoted as saying: 
It is put on the face for one or both of two general reasons: 1) to be like the world around you -- to be CONFORMED TO THIS WORLD, in direct DISOBEDIENCE to God's command; or else, 2) "to look nice," as women express it, which means simply, to CHANGE the appearance so as to make the face prettier than it naturally is -- WHICH IS VANITY! Either is a violation of God's Law, and A SIN!
No, HWA! Makeup is not sinful. You are just using false rhetorical tricks to make your followers feel that they have no choice in this matter and that they must listen to you. You are just trying to brainwash your followers so you can exploit them by getting their three tithes and extra offerings.

HWA is just using black-and-white-thinking to force people to conform to his rule.

Brainwashers like HWA love black- and-white-thinking because you can easily manipulate people using such rhetorical tricks. It is easy to force people to think a certain way if the follower is tricked into taking that sort of attitude to life.

As mruscan put it:
a Christian woman who is solid in her conviction to the Lord is not trying to lure any man after her, she is just trying to present herself at her best. ... Get the hell out of our bathrooms you jerks. You have no right to tell us how to present ourselves looking our best.
It is disgusting that HWA seems to think makeup is all about sex.

In today's society, for a woman to wear makeup is considered normal and forcing women to not wear makeup places unneeded stress upon them. 

It is disgusting that some COG people are still hung up over this ridiculous makeup ban.

Any one enforcing this makeup ban is not godly or righteous but a women-hating, anti-social brainwashed person. They take HWA's words at face value and let him do their thinking for them, instead of understanding what really happened.

From 1978 onwards HWA was reasserting his rule upon WCG. Reimposing the makeup ban was a simple way to kick out anyone who dared to think for themselves and thus could be a threat to his tyrannical rule. The makeup ban was merely a means to an end: namely purging WCG of anyone who refused to conform to his brainwashing

No doubt there are some women who also adhere to this doctrine. I do not think they are women-hating, but there is no good reason to adhere to this useless doctrine.

The foolish Armstrongite wishing to impose HWA's makeup ban then goes on to say: 
Now, this is not an "I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ" type of difference of administration or difference of personality. This is a Satan vs God difference of administration. If you are sinning you are of Satan and not of Christ and are not truly a part of God's True Church unless you repent.
This Armstrongite takes HWA's words at face value and refuse to see what is beyond them, that it was a tool HWA used to impose unity.

This is "I am of Paul; and I of Apollos." Those who allow makeup are persuaded that it is not sinful and they are correct.

In an ironic twist, this doctrine that HWA used to impose unity within WCG is now a major cause of division within the splintered COGs.

How well I recall Bob Thiel, before he appointed himself a Prophet, complaining how Armstrongites were so terribly divided over makeup.

Most Armstrongites sensibly understand that HWA's makeup ban was merely a means to an end and they do not need it any more, so they wisely abandoned it. UCG and Meredith's LCG got rid of it.

But some others, ignorant that HWA's makeup ban was merely a means to an end, dogmatically insist that women are forbidden to wear makeup and denigrate any COG that do not follow them as heretics and fallen from the faith. Flurry's PCG and Pack's RCG ruthlessly use HWA's makeup ban to denigrate any COG that allows makeup and strive to stir up division among other COGs in the hope that some will convert and join them and pay them tithes and offerings.

And sometimes these legalistic people succeed in gaining converts. In 2006 Charles Bryce became persuaded that these thoughtless people were correct and left LCG to start up a legalistic COG cult which forbids makeup, the Enduring Church of God. Around that same time Syd Hull also decided to switch his position and left LCG to join RCG which forbids makeup. He later went back to LCG as a lowly member.
And this doctrine may also be an era difference defining doctrine that separates the Philadelphians from the Laodiceans but this is a doctrine that one is eventually going to have to repent of to be in God's Kingdom. Otherwise, it is a True Church vs Apostates defining doctrine, like Mr. Armstrong's administration vs Joseph Tkach administration and not a Philadelphian vs Laodicean difference.
No, it is not. This Armstrongite has simply taken HWA's black-and-white-thinking and using it claim moral superiority over those who disagree with him. HWA has made him stupid and unable to see that not everything is black and white.

HWA's makeup ban was a truly disgusting thing he imposed upon WCG members and those who seek to follow him. It is a terrible shame that some Armstrongites are still enslaved to this dogma and are trying to deceive other people into adopting this useless and shameful doctrine.

No comments:

Post a Comment