Talk:Gerald Flurry

message: There are several places where I don't understand what you are trying to do.  In particular is the second sentence in the Cult topic.  What does the material in red mean?  I presume it is a reference of sorts, but it doesn't come out that way and I have no way to see what you want.  In addition, we don't normally quote primary sources.  Summarize and link (or add a footnote).
Finally, pulling several paragraphs out of a website word-for-word is plagiarism.  Write it in your own words and give a link.  Good luck with your editing. Ted 05:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing problems 

message: My reading of the charges state he was arrested on 18 Sep 1993, which is a Saturday.  I've deleted the section.  If that is mistaken, put it back in the article with a better citation. Ted 05:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does Gerald Furry Have a Police Record? 

message: While you have referenced www.pcog.info for several points, I can't seem to find anything on that website(please note everyone that this is not a PCG site, but a dissident site run by members who were put out of the church for causing division). It is terribly organized. It's hard to wade through all the vitriol. Where exactly can we find the material that supports your contentions?  Notice how the first reference for disfellowshipping goes directly to that section.  Can this be done for the others?  Are there any other sources? Ted 04:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Response:  The records of those men speak for themselves?  What are you talking about? What records? Your efforts here amount to bafoonary.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.80.157.45 (talk) 18:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCOG Info 

message: Can you at least let me know which links on the left side to click to get the verification for each of the individual points?  Unfortunately, their website is not well-constructed, but we still need a way to get the verification.  In addition, any verification you can get outside the source is good -- it is an attack site and so automatically suspect.  Thanks.  Ted 07:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where on pcog.info is the verification? 

message: Wikipedia is supposed to be a neutral source. Someone is trying to use this entry to make commentary and link to websites intended to defame Mr. Flurry. That goes against the nature of an encyclopedia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.97.81.248 (talk • contribs) 
Thanks for coming here.  We are trying to find verifiable information about Mr. Flurry.  Some of the information is clearly true (his arrest).  Others show some bias or can't be verified easily (I have marked those).  I came to this page by chance while checking Wikipedia for vandalism, so I have no first-hand knowledge of the events.  Wholesale deleting of material does not further the verification process.  It is normally reverted by editors with little knowledge of the topic, such as I did.  Bring your concerns to this Talk page and let's see if we can create a page that is true to all aspects of Mr. Flurry. Ted 02:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Have removed Controversy section in an attempt to balance NPOV about subject. The removed paragraph appears to be unrelated directly to this biography page and would be better addressed in the main entry about Philadelphia Church of God which is linked on article page as well. Preekout 18:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Controversy section 

message: Sorry, but this page can't be taken seriously. I made some verifiable, factual edits, citing sources. They were from a neutral point of view and did not defame Gerald Flurry in any way. Before the day was out the entry went back to the way it had been -- unsubstantiated, for the most part, and clearly subjective.  If Mr. Flurry or his supporters are going to play that game, then this cannot be viewed as having any credibility whatsoever. Wilburweber 21:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased 

message: To be defined as a cult a group need not encourage its followers to commit suicide as some here might have suggested with the Jim Jones comparison.  The act of intimidation or requiring its members to cut off communication with family members who do not hold the same beliefs would most certainly define this organization as a cult. Gerald Flurry and his "government" have instructed this cults followers to cut off all communication with family members who do not believe he is the "end-time prophet" and back this instruction with the threat of a member being disfellowshipped if not obeyed.
This is true, Ted.  Just because Flurry supposedly bases the policy on scripture doesn't make it an attack to note it.  It is perfectly unbiased to point out that Flurry pursues this policy.  In fact, your insistence that Flurry "loves" the Bible and gets this policy from it makes *you* sound biased.  I hope you are not a member of the PCG!  You should be more careful not to whitewash your encyclopedia entries.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.91.216.56 (talk) 01:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cult Defined 

message: Flurry says he is the one man chosen by God to carry on the legacy of Armstrong.  Most or all WCG split-offs also believe they are carrying on Armstrong's work.  To this end, they have magazines, books and booklets to offer.  The larger ones generally have a TV program.  Flurry produces three magazines, a members-only newspaper, a TV program, and a college patterned after Armstrong's Ambassador College.  Some other split-offs have on-line courses, and at least one is planning to build a college.  Flurry is in the process of building a new high quality performing arts center which will be his version of Armstrong's renowned Ambassador Auditorium, but on a smaller scale.  The purpose of this center is to present the church in a more positive light to the community.    
Flurry uses Armstrong's name and image to give his ministry legitimacy in the eyes of his followers, prospective members, and readers of the Trumpet magazine.  Flurry's college is called Armstrong College, his foundation is called the Armstrong International Cultural Foundation, and his concert series is called Armstrong Concerts.  Armstrong's picture is on the cover of the book written by Flurry's son.  
The PCG claims to be preserving Armstrong's written works but has reprinted less than 20 items of Armstrong literature.  Even then, in some cases edits have been made to pivotal points such as the "very elect" and the role of prophets in the church.  Far more Armstrong literature -- literally hundreds of items -- is available on the Internet for free from other sources.  This includes old issues of The Plain Truth magazine, The Good News magazine, The Worldwide News newspaper, reprint articles, Envoys, sermons, sermon transcripts, telecasts, radio broadcasts, and many important booklets that the PCG does not make available.  
The PCG reproduces the correspondence course, even calling it the Herbert W. Armstrong College Bible Correspondence Course, but they have made changes, once again altering Armstrong's legacy. 
Flurry has retained many of Armstrong's core doctrines, including the fundamental "18 restored truths" that Armstrong added to the church, in addition to a great many non-core doctrines that many others regard as minor such as proper hair lengths for men and women.  Flurry has held strictly to Armstrong's "Christian living" doctrines, even the controversial rulings that ban smoking tobacco and the use of cosmetics.   
 
Flurry is building a work that mimics Armstrong's work in many ways.  The college, Auditorium, concert series, and youth camps are all patterned after the WCG when it was led by Armstrong.  Church publications quote Armstrong extensively.  Church services are also after exactly the same format.  Flurry's group keeps the seventh day Sabbath and the same seven annual holy days kept by the "old" WCG and many of its split-offs.  Like Armstrong, he gives away his literature for free.  
He has preserved some Armstrong doctrines that the majority of ex-WCG ministers have neglected.  For example, the basic form of government: top-down one man rule.  This doctrine has been rejected by many WCG split-offs because they believe it has sometimes been abused (particularly by Joseph W. Tkach).  
So, in certain respects, he has preserved Armstrong's legacy diligently, but not in all.    
Flurry rejects Armstrong as the Ezekiel Watchman, a change which removes an important part of Armstrong's legacy.  In addition to taking on the Ezekiel Watchman title for himself, Flurry takes to himself many additional titles such as That Prophet, the Lawgiver, the end-time Prophet Malachi, the Prophet Elisha, etc.  He teaches that his role as the greatest prophet since Christ was foretold in many old testament prophecies.  Such claims lead some to wonder if Flurry is more interested in preserving Armstrong's legacy or building his own on the back of Armstrong's reputation. 
Flurry follows Armstrong's teaching on the identity of the "lost ten tribes" of Israel.  Many other WCG split-offs teach this also.  He also picked up from Armstrong the notion of a soon-coming "United States of Europe" led by a European dictator referred to in the book of Revelation as the "beast" (Rev 17:12-13).  This too is widely taught in other WCG split-offs.  
Flurry has confused Armstrong's prophetic legacy by teaching a mixture of Armstrong's prophecies along with Flurry's own changes and additions.    
His view of Middle East prophecy has changed substantially.  Armstrong taught that the prophecy about the king of the South in Dan 11:40 was already fulfilled by Ethiopia (The Middle East In Prophecy).  Flurry teaches that the king of the South is Iran and that this verse is being fulfilled now (King of the South).  Flurry's writings contain dire warnings about Iran pushing Europe into a nuclear confrontation.  He preaches that Europe will respond by destroying Iran.  He believes this conflict will precede the destruction of the United States and many other English-speaking countries at the hands of Europe.    
By changing the first part of the two-fold great commission of the church from preaching the gospel to preaching prophecy, he has made a fundamental change in the basic purpose of the church.  At the same time, Armstrong's understanding of prophecy has been radically altered.  The result of these two changes is that presenting Flurry's new perspective on prophecy has become the foremost purpose of the church.  This might suggest that he is promoting his own legacy rather than preserving that of Armstrong. 
Because Flurry uses Armstrong's name repeatedly, Flurry's controversial actions (taking various bible titles to himself, his reputation for "attack" sermons and his controlling policy changes) give some of his critics, such as those at the Exit and Support Network, occasion to discredit not just him but Armstrong as well.  This does not seem to help Armstrong's legacy.
*The above is a very nice unsourced essay on how Horrible Flurry is to Change The Great Armstrong's Teachings. I don't even know why I'm posting it here. This is a BLP, so it should be gone period. Auntie E. (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preserving Armstrong's Legacy or Destroying It? 

message: From the doctrinal changes section:
It should be clear that some of these changes are quite controversial. For example, though Flurry claims to be the one man chosen by God to preserve Armstrong's legacy, changes such as rejecting Armstrong's role as the Ezekiel watchman are more in line with destroying Armstrong's legacy than preserving it.
In addition to the doctrinal changes in the above list, Flurry has introduced to his church countless new interpretations of prophecy. Many of these new interpretations are also doctrinal changes because many prophecies that Armstrong applied to nations are now said by Flurry to apply to the WCG, PCG and other WCG split-offs. The changes are far too many to list, but the many new booklets Flurry has written on prophecy testify to the large number of reinterpretations and new ideas. One is hard pressed to find a book or chapter in the bible dealing with prophecy that Flurry hasn't altered in some way -- often significantly. There is no doubt that he follows nearly all Armstrong's other doctrines very closely, provided that they are not related to prophecy. Yet it seems ironic that while Flurry says he is following Armstrong more loyally than any other WCG split-off leader, he has possibly made more changes than any other leader once these prophetic changes and new ideas on prophecy are included. In total, these changes constitute a radical departure from prophecy as understood by Armstrong.
None of these prophetic changes and new ideas would have been possible if Flurry had not rejected Armstrong's teaching on the role of prophets in the New Testament church (original Mystery of the Ages, pp. 244-5, 350). When the PCG reprinted Armstrong's book, Mystery of the Ages they deleted the statement, "No prophets are mentioned as having either administrative, executive or preaching functions in the New Testament Church" (pp. 244-5). As head of the church, Flurry has the role of the chief executive and administrator, and his many sermons and writings clearly demonstrate his preaching function. This change paves the way for him to claim the title of prophet (Who is That Prophet?) and preach and write about his new prophetic beliefs. If he were keeping 100% of Armstrong's teachings, he could not claim to be a prophet in the first place. This explains why Mystery of the Ages has been edited.
There is nothing in the PCG's version of Mystery of the Ages that notifies the reader that Armstrong's teaching regarding the role of prophets in the New Testament church has been removed from the book.
*Can this be sourced? Until it can, it's out. Auntie E. (talk) 01:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving more unsourced opinion 

message: Material not reasonably related to the person the article is about simply does not belong in a BLP.  Extensive speculation and lists of theological details scarcely belong either, but the pruning needs to be done. Imagine if every detail of every religion was placed in every BLP about a pastor of that religion?  References are there for readers to pursue - not or us to list every bit of minutia. Collect (talk) 13:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a Biography - not a theological discourse 

message: This guy is a cook with a cookie church, who says silly things. But I can't find any mainstream media interest, or independent third party discusison. Can anyone else? I'm considering AfD here.--Scott Mac (Doc) 13:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Made major papers  Boston Globe in 1995,  Christianity Today, and a few others.  Cited as sect leader in a number of books meeting RS.  Meets notability standards for sect leaders, to be sure. Collect (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, but do we have anything that doesn't directly relate to Philadelphia Church of God? Could we merge it?--Scott Mac (Doc) 15:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

text: We've also got The Key of David and The Philadelphia Trumpet - all interrelated with much the same content,--Scott Mac (Doc) 15:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Merge is a good idea imo. Off2riorob (talk) 15:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

text: If we keep it here as a short bio, then it will not be a theological coatrack again. Problem with Merge is that it practically invites the same folks to add this stuff all over again. And cut down stray stuff from those other articles as well. There are times when 3 articles will be a lot less trouble than 1. Collect (talk) 15:13, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, at least a few editors are watchlisting it now. Off2riorob (talk) 15:15, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is he even remotely notable?