Show Proper Respect to God-ordained Authority in the Church

This is the time of year when we begin to examine ourselves in preparation for taking Passover in a worthy manner (1 Corinthians 11:25-29, 2 Corinthians 13:5).  Typically, around this time of the year until Passover, I publish posts giving suggestions and sharing my thoughts on this in a spirit of iron-sharpens-iron (Proverbs 27:17) to help readers examine themselves by the scriptures.  I try to share what I have learned and what helps me, and I invite readers to do the same.

I have done this in a general way, but this year I will focus on a particular problem in many Church of God fellowships.  I have been focusing on that problem in the last several posts, and I invite reader feedback.  If you are looking for a more general treatment on self-examination, I refer you to my past posts in previous years just prior to Passover.

The problem in the churches is this.  God commands that we warn the world of the punishment that will come upon them for their sins, especially the nations of Israel.  The people desperately need this warning, whether they repent or not, for reasons I have explained and will continue to explain.

God's command is clear when you put the scriptures together.

Yet it seems that none of the Church of God fellowships has a wide-open door for finishing that warning work.  Some do it in a small way, but nothing as effective, as powerful, and as large as what is needed to reach everyone before the great tribulation begins.

Why?

I believe and propose it is because Christ has not given any fellowship a wide-open door based on their beliefs, practices, and teaching.  There is something wrong.  We are not doing what God tells us.

I believe there are characteristics of Philadelphia that are required for an open door.  These characteristics make a fellowship Philadelphian, and if no fellowship has all these characteristics, then no fellowship is predominantly Philadelphian and no fellowship will be given the open door promised to Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-8).  Belief in and practice of these characteristics makes one a Philadelphian even if leadership and ministry of the fellowship he attends does not practice them.  God judges us individually, and He judges each group according to the actions, teachings, and policies of the leadership and the spiritual state of most of its members.

I believe those characteristics are:  top-down governance, zeal for the gospel and the Ezekiel warning, and willingness to believe the Bible more than the Church of God.

Most of the posts I will publish between now and Passover, for self-examination, will have to do with that last point: we need to be willing to believe the Bible more than the Church of God.  I also plan to continue this subject after Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread because there is so much material to cover.  Yet I have covered most of this in the past several years.  But it needs emphasis and more detail.

I will show that this is a critical area, in terms of loving God with all our being, loving our neighbors as ourselves, and making it to the place of safety and the kingdom of God.  Everything is at stake on this point, for ourselves, for others, and for the glory and honor of God's name and reputation.  Even the quality of our life and happiness in the kingdom of God for eternity is at stake.  For if we get the warning message out and God empowers us to do it, all creation will praise and thank Him forever in the kingdom of God for His fairness, His justice, His love, His wisdom, and His power.

In this post I will focus on one aspect of that subject.  As indicated in the title, we need to have respect for the leadership and ministry God has put into the Church.

But notice I have not said we need to have faith in the leadership and ministry of the Church.  Respect, yes.  Obedience when it does not conflict with God's command, yes.  But faith, no.  Faith should only be towards God.

While we need to have an open mind, a teachable mind, a mind that will listen to what the ministry has to say and consider it in light of the Bible, when all is considered, we must believe what we see in the Bible with our own eyes, letting the Bible interpret the Bible, more than believing the minstry and leadership of the Church and letting them interpret the Bible for us.

Faith is an act of worship, and we must believe God more than man.  Our faith must be towards God the Father, towards Jesus Christ, and towards God's word the Bible.

But to maintain unity we must respect the ministry and not contradict them in conversation with the brethren.

Why is this important?

The leadership and ministry of any fellowship must strive to maintain unity and put out those who cause division.  This is a role God has given them (Ephesians 4:11-16, Matthew 16:19, Matthew 18:18, Titus 3:10-11, 1 Corinthians 1:10, Romans 16:17).  A house divided cannot stand (Mark 3:24-25).  No organization, in the world or in the Church, can survive and prosper if it is torn by division and in-fighting.

So how does the leadership and ministry of a COG fellowship do this regarding doctrine?

I know of only three ways.

One, they can stick to everything Mr. Armstrong taught and not change anything, even when the Bible indicates change is needed.  This is one way of trying to maintain doctrinal unity in a fellowship.  It has the advantage of simplicity, but it is wrong because it cuts us off from new knowledge Christ wants to teach us.

Two, they can teach the brethren to believe the leadership and ministry regarding doctrine, to let the ministry interpret the Bible for them, and to trust in two things: that Christ will correctly lead the Church and its ministry (correct), and that the Church and its ministry will follow where Christ leads (not correct).  This is wrong because, while Christ will lead, the leadership and ministry of a group do not necessarily follow.  So what the ministry teaches is not necessarily what Christ teaches.  So this approach to unity is wrong.  To follow this approach requires faith and trust in man to follow Christ, and only God can be trusted not to make mistakes or be unfaithful - not man.

Three, they can teach the brethren to not contradict the leadership and ministry of the fellowship they attend.  If a member sees that something in the Bible is different from what the ministry teaches, he should keep quiet about it with the brethren.  Wait for Christ to make the correction even if we wait till he returns.  Put it on the shelf.  

This last approach is correct, and that is what I will address in this post.

Unless the brethren learn to not contradict the ministry, and unless the ministry teaches the brethren to not contradict them, the only other ways the leadership can try to maintain unity are the first two I listed:  believe Mr. Armstrong or believe the Church, and both are contrary to faith in the Bible, which is required for the open door to warn the world.

Unless respect for the authority of the leadership and ministry of the Church is properly taught and practiced, we will have no open door as Christ promised Philadelphia, and without that open door, there will be no warning to the world, God's name will not be glorified for His love and fairness to warn before punishing, Israel will not have its best chance for salvation (because they will not see God's fairness in punishing them for things they did not know were wrong and without giving them a warning first and it will be hard for them to trust God afterwards), and we will not go to a place of safety.  We ourselves may lose our salvation if we don't repent.

So everything is at stake here.  We must learn to respect the ministry in matters of controversy.  It is a vital step in the salvation of millions, in the glory of God's name, and in our own salvation.

We need to know what the ministry has authority over and what it does not have authority over.  We need to know the limits of their authority in order to respect that authority.

We are told to obey those who rule over us in the Church, that is, the leadership and the ministry (Hebrews 13:17, 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15, Hebrews 13:7).  There are limits, but the principle is valid within those limits.

One limit, I think COG members generally understand, is that we must obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29).  If a minister tells us to do something that is a violation of God's commands and His word the Bible, such as tell a lie, we must not disobey God.  We must obey God even if it means disobeying the minister.

But there is another limit, and that is, the context of the command to obey the ministry.  That context is not given in the passage that tells us to obey, but it is given elsewhere.

The ministry has authority over the organized work of the Church.  This is described in a passage that is the real context of commands to obey the ministry.
 
"And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head - Christ - from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love" (Ephesians 4:11-16).

"And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues" (1 Corinthians 12:28).

There are also other passages scattered in the Bible that show the context of the authority of the ministry, such as caring for the poor in the Church (Acts 6:1-6) and resolving disputes between brethren (Matthew 18:15-20).

There are other lines of authority that come from God the Father and Jesus Christ that apply to us personally that do not go through the ministry.  The ministry does not have authority over us in those things.  I describe these lines of authority, with organization charts, in chapter eight of my book, Preaching the Gospel.  Also you might read my post dated March 8, 2014 entitled, "Does the Ministry Stand between Us and God?", which explains the limitations of the authority of the ministry.

For example, consider this passage.  "But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God" (1 Corinthians 11:3).  Notice that the ministry is not mentioned in this chain of command.  In the context of matters of managing the household, the wife obeys her husband - he is over her in authority - not the local pastor.  Who does the husband report to?  Who is over him in authority over the matters of the household?  The pastor?  Not according to the Bible.  God says, the head of the man is Christ.  Christ rules the man directly in this area, not the Church.

And in matters that are understood to be between God and us, such as prayer, obedience to God's law, loving God, faith and trust in God, believing the Bible, our personal salvation and relationship with the Father etc., we are responsible to and are ruled directly by Christ.  Does this apply only to men?  No, it applies to men and women.  "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28).  

So a woman is ruled by her husband in matters of the house, such as whether to get an outside job, how much money to spend on food, how to discipline the children, what rules to set and enforce in the house, etc.  But in obedience to God and in her prayer life, she obeys Christ directly.  If her husband tells her to sin, for example by telling a lie, she is to obey God rather than man.

But in the organized work of the Church, Christ rules through the leadership and ministry, not each person individually.  In the organized work of the Church, each person should obey the ministry, not just Christ directly.

What is the organized work of the Church?

Setting official doctrine to be taught to the Church and preached to the world and teaching that doctrine is one.  Answering go-to's and inviting new people to services and baptizing those who are ready is another.  Also included is ruling on divorce and remarriage, disputes between brethren, spending first, second, and third tithes and offerings, caring for the poor, anointing the sick, arranging meeting places and times, counseling, discipline including disfellowshipping and marking, preaching the gospel and the Ezekiel warning, performing marriages and funerals, blessing of little children, giving sermons, setting speaking schedules, setting the order of services, etc.

That is a lot.  But it is not everything.

And within this context or area of responsibility is included the setting of doctrine and avoiding division over doctrine.

This means we are not to contradict the doctrinal teachings and decisions of the leadership and ministry of the fellowship we attend.  If we disagree with something, we should avoid the topic when talking with other brethren.

And if we are giving a sermonette, split sermon, or sermon, we should not introduce new doctrines without getting approval from those above us, even up to the level of the man who leads the whole fellowship, whatever his title might be.  We can talk with those above us in authority in private and in a respectful way, and debate it with them, but's that's all.

Remember, God commands that those who cause division be put out (Romans 16:17), and God holds the ministry responsible for enforcing this.

What if something comes up that is so major in importance that you feel you cannot keep silent - you must make a stand?

Then leave that fellowship.  If they have a problem so grave that you cannot wait for Christ to correct it, if you cannot keep silent, if you have to make a stand and speak out, then it is serious enough that you should not remain with that fellowship.  Leave.  After that, you can say what you want.  You can say what you want from outside that organization because you will not be in it any longer and no longer under the authority of its leadership and ministry.  You won't be creating division from within.

This brings up another point.  We are in the Laodicean era.  We are divided because Christ has spit us out of His mouth.  "So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth" (Revelation 3:16).  And because we are divided into separate fellowships, no one leader has authority over the whole Church of God.

To put it plainly, Mr. Gerald Weston has authority over Living Church of God, but not over Church of God Assembly or any other COG fellowship, nor does he have authority over scattered brethren who are not part of any fellowship but are only able to worship God from home.  Likewise, Mr. Sheldon Monson has authority over Church of God Assembly, but not over Living Church of God.  So if you are not a member of or attending with any fellowship, your head is Christ, directly, not any ministry.  This is not ideal and hopefully will be temporary until you can find a faithful fellowship to attend, but sometimes it is necessary for a while.  Respect and honor the ministry as much as you can, feel free to contribute tithes and offerings to whomever is doing the best job of doing God's work, but the ministers do not have authority over you.

But try to find a faithful group you can support and attend, if possible.  And join with any group that you judge as faithful.  Then obey that group in the organized work of the Church.

But if you willingly go into a fellowship, you can willingly leave if you later see that it is not faithful, either because the leadership and ministry have changed or you have your eyes opened to see what you did not see before.

But do not undermine the authority of the leadership by causing division in a fellowship while you are in it.

This is a good subject for self-examination before Passover.



Lessons about Authority in the Bible


God requires that we respect and obey the authority He has ordained.

Consider these passages that show how God thinks on this matter in both the Old Testament and New Testament.

"And you shall come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge there in those days, and inquire of them; they shall pronounce upon you the sentence of judgment. You shall do according to the sentence which they pronounce upon you in that place which the Lord chooses. And you shall be careful to do according to all that they order you. According to the sentence of the law in which they instruct you, according to the judgment which they tell you, you shall do; you shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left from the sentence which they pronounce upon you. Now the man who acts presumptuously and will not heed the priest who stands to minister there before the LORD your God, or the judge, that man shall die. So you shall put away the evil from Israel. And all the people shall hear and fear, and no longer act presumptuously" (Deuteronomy 17:9-13).

"Then Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married; for he had married an Ethiopian woman. So they said, 'Has the LORD indeed spoken only through Moses? Has He not spoken through us also?' And the LORD heard it....Suddenly the LORD said to Moses, Aaron, and Miriam, 'Come out, you three, to the tabernacle of meeting!' So the three came out. Then the LORD came down in the pillar of cloud and stood in the door of the tabernacle, and called Aaron and Miriam. And they both went forward.  Then He said, 'Hear now My words....Why then were you not afraid To speak against My servant Moses?'  So the anger of the LORD was aroused against them, and He departed. And when the cloud departed from above the tabernacle, suddenly Miriam became leprous, as white as snow. Then Aaron turned toward Miriam, and there she was, a leper" (Numbers 12:1-10).

"Whoever rebels against your [Joshua's] command and does not heed your words, in all that you command him, shall be put to death. Only be strong and of good courage" (Joshua 1:18).

"And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.  Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 18:17-18).

I think the binding and loosening authority God has given the ministry applies to the official doctrines that will be taught by the Church.  The leadership and ministry have the binding and loosening authority to command what will be taught in and out of the Church, but they do not have authority over what people believe.  "Not that we have dominion over your faith, but are fellow workers for your joy; for by faith you stand" (2 Corinthians 1:24).

It is better to teach the authority of the Church to set doctrine by the binding and loosening authority Christ has given the leadership rather than by emphasizing that Christ is the head of the Church.  When you emphasize Christ as head of the Church, you are implying that the Church is faithful to follow Christ, which is not always true.

"But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. And he kept back part of the proceeds, his wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles' feet. But Peter said, 'Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.' Then Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and breathed his last. So great fear came upon all those who heard these things. And the young men arose and wrapped him up, carried him out, and buried him.  Now it was about three hours later when his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. And Peter answered her, 'Tell me whether you sold the land for so much?' She said, 'Yes, for so much.' Then Peter said to her, 'How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.' Then immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. And the young men came in and found her dead, and carrying her out, buried her by her husband. So great fear came upon all the church and upon all who heard these things" (Acts 5:1-11).

"Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, saying: 'The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do' " (Matthew 23:1-3).

"then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries, whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord" (2 Peter 2:9-11).

"Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries. Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, 'The Lord rebuke you!' But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves." (Jude 8-10).

"You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people" (Exodus 22:28).

"And we urge you, brethren, to recognize those who labor among you, and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake. Be at peace among yourselves" (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13).

"Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you" (Hebrews 13:17).

"Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct" (Hebrews 13:7).  

"And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother" (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15).

There may be other passages that show the same point, but these are the ones that come to my mind.

Sometimes, there may be a difference between respecting the office and respecting the man who hold the office.  Sometimes it is hard to respect the man himself if we see unfaithfulness.  But we have to be careful here to judge with mercy as we want to be judged, and give the person the benefit of the doubt.  "Judge  not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you" (Matthew 7:1-2). We should try to respect the man as much as we can, though our respect might be limited.

But we can always respect the office by obeying and submitting to the authority of the office as much as we can without disobeying God.



The Importance of Respecting Authority for the Preaching of the Gospel


This matter of respecting the authority God has ordained in the Church of God fellowships and not contradicting the leadership and ministry is vitally important for preaching the gospel and the Ezekiel warning to the world.

Why?

One obvious reason is that God is unlikely to want new people to come into a fellowship that is torn by division.  A successful work will bring in new people, and God may not want to expose new people to a fellowship with people setting a bad example.

But there is another reason, and I briefly mentioned it above.

The leadership of every group must try to maintain unity.  As I said, there are three ways to do this, and two of them are poison to preaching the gospel.

The leadership can teach the brethren to believe the ministry or to believe Mr. Armstrong.  Both of these are poison.  Both are idolatry.  We cannot let Mr. Armstrong interpret the Bible for us, or the ministry and leadership to interpret the Bible for us.  We must let the Bible interpret the Bible as Mr. Armstrong taught and practiced.  

Teaching the brethren that nothing must be changed that Mr. Armstrong taught is making an idol of Mr. Armstrong and rejecting the way of life of believing the Bible more than the Church that Mr. Armstrong (and Loma) practiced as a way of life and taught by word and example that we should do the same.  Not only does this make an idol out of Mr. Armstrong, having faith in him that he taught correctly, faith that should only belong to God, but it blocks the Church from learning new knowledge from the Bible that Christ wants to teach us.  It is a rejection of Christ and the Bible.

But teaching the brethren to believe the ministry and leadership and their interpretation of the Bible is just as bad.  Those who practice this can at least learn new knowledge.  But they also practice idolatry.  They don't make an idol out of Mr. Armstrong, but they make idols out of themselves.  They ignore a simple and easy-to-understand principle that just because Christ through the Bible leads us correctly does not mean that the ministry follows Him correctly.

Both approaches, believe Mr. Armstrong or believe the leadership and ministry, make it impossible to receive God's blessings and an open door for preaching the gospel and Ezekiel warning to the world.  Why?  As I have said before, to preach the gospel we have to say to them, as Mr. Armstrong said, don't believe me, don't believe any man, believe God, believe your Bible.  How are they and we to do that?  We let the Bible interpret the Bible, letting clear passages interpret unclear passages.  That is what Mr. Armstrong taught and practiced.  That is what Loma Armsrong practiced.  That is what thousands of early supporters of the Church who heard Mr. Armstrong on radio practiced.

And God blessed them with an open door we do not see today.

The third method for maintaining unity is the correct one.  Do not teach the brethren to believe Mr. Armstrong.  Do not teach the brethren to believe the leadership and ministry.  Instead, teach them to believe the Bible directly, but do not contradict the ministry.  If you see something in the Bible that shows the ministry is wrong, don't discuss it with others, except, if you wish, with the leadership itself.

If the leadership does not directly teach the brethren to not contradict the ministry and leadership in doctrine, that leadership may feel it has no choice but to use one of the other methods, believe Mr. Armstrong or believe the leadership, to maintain unity.  And those are both wrong and will disqualify a fellowship from an open door needed to preach the gospel with the power, scope, and effectiveness needed to finish the work.

So let me make it plain as I can.

The leadership and ministry of a fellowship MUST say to the brethren, "Do not contradict the leadership in doctrine", or that fellowship will not have an open door for the gospel.  Because, if that is not their way of maintaining unity, they will be tempted to use one of the other wrong methods to try to maintain unity.  If there is an exception to this, I have not seen it.

Every lay member, deacon, local elder, employed pastor, etc. must believe the Bible more than any human authority above him.  If that leads to disagreement on doctrine, then that man must believe the Bible more than he believes any man in the Church.  If he chooses, he can discuss it respectfully with those above him, having an open mind and teachable attitude, and that may resolve it.  The leadership may show him his error.  But if it is not resolved, then he must continue to believe what he sees in the Bible.  But he should keep quiet about it.  Don't discuss it with others.  Don't give sermonettes or sermons about it.  Wait for Christ to return and resolve it.  Put it on the shelf.  Believe God first, but respect the leadership and ministry over you.  Don't cause division (Romans 16:17).

And if the disagreement is too big for that, leave the fellowship, but don't create division from within the fellowship.

So let's say you disagree on some matter with the fellowship you attend, and you are at a restaurant in conversation with other brethren in that fellowship.  Maybe you disagree about new moons, for example.

So someone at the table says to you, "Archie, what do you think about new moons?"  (I know your name is probably not Archie.)  You can say, "I'd rather not talk about it".  The other person says, "Oh, come on, what do you think?  I want to know your opinion.  Are we required to keep new moons or not?"  You answer, "Ask the pastor".  "I'm asking you".  "I'm not going to discuss it.  If you have questions, ask the pastor."

Be polite but firm.  Will it seem awkward?  Maybe.  But have the courage to be firm even when it seems socially awkward.  We will all need courage in the years ahead anyway.  Learn it now.  This may take wisdom too, and you can pray for that (James 1:5).

You might say that, by declining to discuss it you can give the impression to others that you disagree.

So what.  It can't be helped.  Let them conclude what they want.  By not discussing it, you are keeping your reasons for any possible disagreement quiet.  You aren't persuading anyone of any position contrary to the Church.  You aren't sharing any arguments that might raise doubts in their minds.  They may guess that you disagree, but they won't be persuaded by your reasons because they won't know what your reasons are.

And if the person you are talking to has spiritual discernment, he or she will respect your privacy and not push.

We cannot say to the public, don't believe us, believe your Bible, and in services tell brethren, believe Mr. Armstrong, or believe the Church.  I don't think God will give an open door to hypocrites.  Yet, if the Church does not teach, believe the Bible but don't contradict the ministry, then it has little choice but to say believe Mr. Armstrong or believe the Church on doctrine to maintain unity.



Is Correction Always from the Top Down?


Since I came into the Church of God in the early 1980's, I have heard people say, correction is always from the top down.  Is that true?

It depends on what you mean by correction.  If you mean punishment or undermining someone in authority over you, yes, that kind of correction is only from the top down.

But if you mean corrective advice given respectfully to someone over you in authority, and the correction is not given openly in front of others in a way that undermines authority in the eyes of others but is given confidentially in private, then no, correction is not always from the top down but sometimes is from the bottom up.  

God gives two examples in the Bible that illustrate this, maybe more than two, but these two stand out to me.

The wrong kind of correction, correction that should only be from the top down but wasn't, is illustrated by the example of Aaron and Miriam speaking against Moses.

I quoted this passage earlier in this post.

Notice that they spoke with each other about Moses.  Notice the wording, has not God spoken through "us".  By criticizing Moses, not in private to avoid embarrassing him, but speaking together with each other, perhaps behind Moses's back, they were undermining each other's respect for Moses's authority.  Aaron undermined Moses's authority in Miriam's mind and Miriam undermined Moses in the eyes of Aaron.  By talking to each other, they each diminished the respect the other person should have for Moses and his office.  God had to correct the situation, and in so doing God gave us a lesson for our time.  We should learn from the wrong example of Aaron and Miriam.

This same kind of thing happens when a member contradicts the minister in the hearing of others who should respect the minister.  We are commanded to esteem the ministry highly.  "And we urge you, brethren, to recognize those who labor among you, and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake. Be at peace among yourselves" (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13).  But if we hear someone give us persuasive arguments on some doctrine that undermines what the pastor says, that person makes our job of respecting and esteeming the pastor more difficult.  God does not want that.

Now let's look at an example that shows the right way to correct someone over us in authority, correction from the bottom up you could say.  And this kind of correction must have God's approval because He blessed it with a miraculous blessing, good fruit for sure.

This is the story of Naaman and the healing of his leprosy.

"Now Naaman, commander of the army of the king of Syria, was a great and honorable man in the eyes of his master, because by him the LORD had given victory to Syria. He was also a mighty man of valor, but a leper. And the Syrians had gone out on raids, and had brought back captive a young girl from the land of Israel. She waited on Naaman’s wife. Then she said to her mistress, 'If only my master were with the prophet who is in Samaria! For he would heal him of his leprosy.' And Naaman went in and told his master, saying, 'Thus and thus said the girl who is from the land of Israel.'  Then the king of Syria said, 'Go now, and I will send a letter to the king of Israel.'

"So he departed and took with him ten talents of silver, six thousand shekels of gold, and ten changes of clothing....Then Naaman went with his horses and chariot, and he stood at the door of Elisha’s house. And Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying, 'Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall be restored to you, and you shall be clean.'  But Naaman became furious, and went away and said, 'Indeed, I said to myself, "He will surely come out to me, and stand and call on the name of the LORD his God, and wave his hand over the place, and heal the leprosy." Are not the Abanah and the Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Could I not wash in them and be clean?' So he turned and went away in a rage.  And his servants came near and spoke to him, and said, 'My father, if the prophet had told you to do something great, would you not have done it? How much more then, when he says to you, "Wash, and be clean"?' So he went down and dipped seven times in the Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God; and his flesh was restored like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean" (2 Kings 5:1-14).  

So Naaman's servants gave him corrective advice.  Notice they were affectionate and supportive.  They were trying to help.  And they were very respectful, calling him "father", as a son respects and loves his father.

Notice something else.  Maybe this is something or maybe it is not, but if our English translation is strictly accurate and literal, they did not say "our father" but "my father".  Does this mean they did not go to Naaman in a group, but individually, maybe privately?  Maybe two or three servants went to Naaman to say this privately and confidentially to him, each not knowing what the other said?  If so, it supports the principle of correcting someone over you confidentially and in private.

And God blessed this kind of correction.  It came from the bottom up, but God blessed it with a miraculous healing, a good fruit definitely.

So if by correction you mean the kind of correction of Moses by Aaron and Miriam, then that kind of correction is only from the top down.  But if by correction you mean the kind of respectful correction of Naaman by his servants, then no, correction is not always from the top down.

It is not unlawful in God's eyes, as I see it in the Bible, to respectfully and confidentially tell your pastor he is mistaken.

But be careful.  Use wisdom.  Not all ministers are righteous.  Correcting a minister this way is an option, but it may not be wise to exercise this option.  If the minister is wise, he will love you (Proverbs 9:8-9).  But if not, he may hate you and act against you (Proverbs 9:8).  You have to judge if the minister will receive correction.  If not, better to keep quiet.  God allows respectful correction but does not necessarily require it in every case (Proverbs 22:3, Proverbs 27:12).

The same principle can apply to a fellowship and its top leadership.  Some fellowships and leaders are not receptive to any kind of correction or new knowledge from lay members, and if that is the case in the fellowship you attend, making a suggestion or questioning the doctrines of the group not only would be a waste of time but in some cases may get you kicked out.  It is your judgment call.

But whatever you do, don't openly cause division in the flock.  When you contradict or criticize a minister in the hearing of the flock, you undermine his authority over the flock and you undermine the respect and obedience the flock should have towards the minister.  That is not God's way.

Mr. Monson in a Bible study given on or around 1/31/25 I think, maybe around 36 minutes into the Bible study, said something I agree with wholeheartedly. I will paraphrase, so this is not a quote.  But he said something to the effect that we may have a disagreement, and we can talk to our pastor about it, and we can debate it, but do not cause division.  Keep it to yourself and keep unity.

I agree with Mr. Monson one hundred percent on this point, and I thought he expressed it well.

This should be the way to maintain unity, letting everyone put the Bible first.  Then we can honestly say to the public, don't believe us, believe your Bible, and get good results because God sees we are doing what we tell others to do.  And when new people come in, they can see our good example of respecting authority and maintaining unity, and they can learn from our positive example as God intends.

It is important to not create division about the things we disagree about by talking about it openly.  If division is created that way, that only reinforces the tendency of the ministry to insist that people align their beliefs with what the Church teaches (whether Mr. Armstrong or the current leadership and ministry) rather than the Bible.  Peace and unity that results from members not voicing their disagreements but keeping them confidential may be a precursor to the Church teaching real faith in the Bible more than the Church.

"Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Corinthians 1:10).

To summarize, if you see something in the Bible that is contrary to what the leadership and ministry in your group teaches, believe the Bible, but do it quietly - don't contradict the ministry with other members.  And if it is a major matter you feel you must take a stand on and you can't remain silent, then leave the group, and you can say what you want from outside that group.  Or, if you choose to speak out on this major thing within the group in front of other members, expect to be put out and maybe marked for causing division.

And if the leadership wants a wide-open door for preaching the gospel, it should teach this process and way of life to the Church.



Recognizing the Authority of the Ministry


I have previously quoted 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13, which says we should recognize the ministry.

A minister has said, recognize the government God has ordained in His Church.  This is right, but there are boundaries.  We must obey and believe God first and we must recognize that no leader or group of leaders of a single fellowship or local pastor has authority over the whole Church of God.  God is not working in only one place right now.  Also, the authority of the ministry is for the work of the Church, not everything.

But also, while we are recognizing the government God has placed in the Church, we should not only recognize the authority of the ministry over the organized work of the Church, but we must also recognize the government God has ordained in his Church from Christ to each person direct and from Christ through the man to his wife over the matters of the household.



Might God Reveal New Knowledge to a Lay Member of the Church But Not the Leadership or Ministry?


I once heard a minister or local elder say, in a sermon or sermonette, that God would never reveal new knowledge to him before revealing it to the leadership because that would be destructive of hierarchical government.

That statement is total nonsense.  I don't think you can find anything in the Bible to honestly back that up.  Even this world's corporations listen to employee information and suggestions and even have suggestion boxes.

You only need to look at what God had done with Mr. Armstrong when he attended with the Church of God Seventh Day.  God certainly did reveal new knowledge to him, though he was not even ordained, knowledge that the leadership of the Church of God Seventh Day did not have.

By revealing new knowledge, I mean, of course, revealing new knowledge through the Bible with members letting the Bible interpret the Bible and using clear scriptures to interpret unclear ones and with God helping the members to understand passages in the Bible by the power of His Spirit working in them.

Why might God reveal new knowledge to a lay member or local elder or lower-ranked pastor before revealing it to the top leadership and ministry in the Church?  Why might God open a member's mind to understand a passage of scripture while not opening the mind of the top leadership on that subject?

God might do this to test the leadership - is he willing to humble himself to accept correction and instruction from someone of lower rank?  Like foot-washing can be humbling, so can accepting instruction in this case.  God can use this to humble and test the ministry.

But it can also be a test of character for the lay member or lower-ranked minister that God reveals the knowledge to.  Will his heart be lifted up in pride and vanity because he thinks he has knowledge no one else has?  Or will he be humble and not think highly of himself because of this.

"Now concerning things offered to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know" (1 Corinthians 8:1-2).

Will he create division by promoting his idea and discussing it with other members of the Church, contrary to God's way, not showing respect to the ministry, contradicting the ministry on that point of doctrine?

How should a member handle this if God reveals, through the Bible, new knowledge that the Church does not have?

With new knowledge, as with any gift, comes responsibility - responsibility to handle the gift in a godly way.  He can offer it to the leadership confidentially and respectfully and keep quiet about it with the brethren.  Then it is the responsibility of the leadership to research it and make a decision for the whole Church.  And if the leadership rejects it, perhaps wrongly, then the member should wait on Christ, and if necessary, even wait till Christ returns.

In this case, the member should keep the matter confidential just as he would keep something a friend in the Church told him, maybe a personal problem, confidential.

He should not lie about it, voicing agreement with the Church on something he doesn't agree with.  He must only tell the truth.  But he can keep quiet about it.

If your friend was having a personal problem, something he didn't want to share with everyone, but he told you about it in confidence, perhaps asking for you prayers and advice, could you not keep quiet about it?  Of course you could.  And just as you would keep the matter in confidence, not gossiping about it, so you should keep disagreements on doctrine between you and the leadership confidential.  That is not hypocrisy.

In this way, new knowledge should be handled responsibly.

I talk about this more in my November 5, 2010 post entitled, "The Responsible Use of New Knowledge".

God has given the job of teaching doctrine to the Church to the ordained ministry.  Members who discover new knowledge should not interfere with the ministry's teaching by openly criticizing that teaching.  If the ministry makes a doctrinal mistake, a member who notices it should not use it as an opportunity to criticize the ministry.  He can address it with the ministry quietly, or if necessary discuss it with headquarters, but not gossip about it with the brethren.  

God is not the author of confusion - 1 Corinthians 14:33.  It is discouraging and creates division when a member is seeking to be taught by the ministry and then hears another member criticize or contradict what the minister has taught.  We come to Sabbath services for peace and fellowship, not controversy and disrespect.  People who cannot keep their mouths shut about their disagreements should stay home, and if not, then the ministry should put them out promptly (after at least one warning - Titus 3:10).

Being right in our view is no excuse for contradicting the ministry and creating division.  Even if we are correct in our understanding of the Bible and the Church is wrong, we must respect the office God has ordained and not contradict.  God has given the leadership and ministry the authority to establish doctrine that will be taught to the brethren and the world - He has not given the lay members that job.  They can only offer advice to the ministry - the decision on what should be taught is not theirs to make.

Paul showed respect towards the high priest even though the high priest was wrong (Acts 23:1-5).

However, if the member does not openly talk among the members about his disagreements, but discusses them privately and respectfully with those ministers or leaders over him in an effort to either understand or get a change made in Church teaching, properly going through channels as he should, he should not be disfellowshipped simply because he does not agree with Church authority about what God is saying in the Bible.   

Members believing the Bible more than the Church, letting the Bible interpret the Bible and believing and obeying what God says, does not create confusion and division.  Criticizing and contradicting the ministry does create division.

And if the leadership and ministry are so far off base in major doctrines and it becomes obvious that they do not believe the Bible, such as if they say Sunday is the Sabbath or that it is ok to celebrate Christmas and Easter or that man has an immortal soul, it may be necessary for members to take a stand and leave the group.  In that case, it is the leadership and ministry that are creating the division and they bear responsibility for the separation.



Further Reading


For more on the topic of Christ leading the Church through multiple lines of authority, not just through the ministry, see my August 23, 2020 post entitled, "The Ministry's Authority to Limit Contact (Marking)".  Also see chapter 8 of my online book (big blue link in upper right hand corner of this page) Preaching the Gospel, which illustrates this with organizational charts.

For more on the topic of the best way for the Church to teach the brethren to respect and obey the leadership and ministry, see my October 21, 2020 post entitled, "The Best Way to Teach Authority".

CGA Message and My Supporting Comments

On Saturday, January 25, 2025, Sheldon Monson gave a message at CGA Sabbath services that contained a number of good points.  Much of that message was in the announcements I think.  I want to review some of it and add a few supporting comments.

First, the sermonette speaker, Gavin Bennett, made the point that we should only criticize when we have ways of lifting up and helping.  I think this is an excellent point.  If we criticize, we should do it in a spirit of love and trying to help the other person improve.

Then, Mr. Monson gave the announcements and the sermon.  He described several aspects of preaching the gospel that CGA is moving forward with.  I am glad CGA is trying to preach the gospel, and I hope and pray they have some effective success.  Even if, because they may have certain problems, their work is small, small is better than nothing.  Every little bit helps get the warning message out.  I hope God judges CGA favorably and gives them an open door, even if that open door is only open a little.  And if CGA grows in knowledge and policy and makes certain changes, I think God will give them a wider door.

I think a wide-open door, which is what is needed, will only be given when a group is raised that has all the important Philadelphia characteristics, including willingness and policy of being willing to change and correct doctrine according to the Bible, from the leadership on down.  Until Christ raises a leader of such a group, or until an existing group leader repents, the work will not get done.

But in the meantime, even a small movement towards preaching the gospel has more value than nothing.

I think there are probably a number of people in CGA who have a Philadelphia attitude, and for their sake God may give that organization a slightly open door for preaching the gospel and the Ezekiel warning to Israel, even if that door is open only a crack at the present time.  I think it can increase later if the group learns to fully follow Mr. Armstrong's way of life.  But any increase in the effort to preach the gospel right now is good news, I think.  

CGA has new billboards now conveying the message.  Work is proceeding on an E magazine to come out in March.  Short videos are being recorded.  All this is in addition to the regular YouTube videos, HWA library, and posters.  A recording studio is being set up for podcasts.

During the announcement period, before the sermon, Mr. Monson addressed a few doctrinal issues some have brought up.  He talked about sacred names, the calendar, and eating in restaurants on the Sabbath.  I can summarize my position by saying that I agree with him and with Mr. Armstrong on all these issues, and I will add a few of my own comments supporting CGA's position and the position of most of the whole Church of God on these things.

On the issue of sacred names, my understanding is that there are some that think we should try to pronounce God's name as it was originally given.  But that is impossible.  Pronunciation is not recorded, and we have Bible evidence that pronunciation changes over time (Judges 12:5-6).  Also, the writers of the New Testament, who wrote under inspiration of God, translated Hebrew scriptures into Greek when quoting the Old Testament, and when they translated God's name, they translated it into the Greek word that most matches the Hebrew word in meaning, not pronunciation.  So this cannot be wrong.

On the matter of the calendar, as Mr. Monson pointed out, Christ observed the calendar of the Jews and we observe the same calendar.

I have heard that some think we should observe a calendar based only on observation, not on calculation, basing their argument on the scripture that says that the heavenly bodies are in place for the purpose of marking time and months (Genesis 1:14).  But this misses the point that even a calculated calendar is based on observation, because observations must be first made to establish a pattern for future calculations.  So even a calculated calendar is based on heavenly bodies as the scripture says.

Some object to eating in restaurants on the Sabbath.  But the workers at restaurants are not our servants.  Try giving a waitress the day off.  And keeping the Sabbath is not just avoiding work at our regular job.  Even if that waitress did not work at the restaurant on Saturday, she would not be keeping the Sabbath.  She would be doing housework, shopping, watching TV or movies, etc.  She would not be attending services, praying, and studying the Bible in observance of God's Sabbath.

And remember, the Sabbath is a special sign between the Creator and His people.  It is a sign, by a special Sabbath covenant, that points us to God as the creator of the earth and mankind and shows God that we are His people because we are willing to believe and obey him (Exodus 31:12-17).  This was Mr. Armstrong's teaching and has long been the teaching of the Church, and it is correct.  That sign does not belong to the restaurant employees who work on the Sabbath.  It is strictly between us and God, and it does not apply to outsiders.  It represents something between us and God that the restaurant employees do not have, and frankly, are not even entitled to without full repentance.

Mr. Monson also talked about various things we do on the Sabbath that require outsiders in the world to work, such as use water and electricity and heating gas, fill up our cars with gas, pay tolls on the highway to get to services, etc.  I can also add, as someone who has lived in a large metropolitan area, the need for some members to pay bus drivers, buy a train ticket and take a train, or pay a cab driver to get them to services.  Sometimes other members can provide rides, but this is not always possible.

He also gave an excellent explanation of how someone should handle the situation if they have a conscience problem with eating at a restaurant on the Sabbath.  He said such a person should refrain from doing so but not try to force his or her beliefs on others, and I think that is exactly right.

Mr. Monson said that when the Church kept Pentecost on a Monday, some brethren knew it should be Sunday, so what did they do?  They kept both.  That also kept peace in the Church, and I think it was the correct way to handle it.

He said that while he was working for LCG, LCG taught positions on the falling away and the location of the marriage supper that he disagreed with.  So what did he do?  He did not teach LCG's position, but he didn't teach against it either.  If people had questions, he simply told them what LCG taught without stating if he agreed with it or not.  I think that is exactly the right way to handle it.


On a separate note, I would also like to add that this past Friday LCG published a sermon on their website by Mr. Wallace Smith on giving thanks to God, and I found it to be excellent.  I learned things about thanksgiving I had not considered before.  I highly recommend it, as I recommend CGA's message this past Sabbath if you can hear the announcement portion.


I would like to say something about setting the goal of making it into God's kingdom and making that our number one goal.  I agree that it should be an important goal, and I think Paul made it his goal also (Philippians 3:13-14).  But we should also make it a priority goal, maybe our number one goal, to help millions of others make it into God's kingdom by giving a warning message and the true gospel.  And, interestingly, making the gospel and the warning our number one goal, to help others and love our neighbors, no doubt indirectly helps us reach the goal of making it into the kingdom.

It is like making happiness a goal.  If we focus on trying to make ourselves happy, we will not find happiness, but if we focus on serving God and helping others more than seeking our own happiness, we will eventually find true happiness.

"For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it" (Mark 8:35).

Paul made it his goal to make it into the kingdom of God.  But at one point he expressed his concern for his fellow Jews, saying, in effect, that he could be willing to give up his salvation if it could help the Jews be saved.  Here is a quote.  "I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh..." (Romans 9:1-3).

Consider that example, and let's make it a priority goal to get the gospel and the Ezekiel warning message out to the masses that need it.  If we make that our number one goal, to practice the give way of life, to save others and glorify God's name and reputation for fairness, I think we can trust God to help us with our own salvation.

The Bible seems to indicate that the two witnesses receive power xat the start of the great tribulation, not before.  So if they are only given power at that time, how can they use that power to get a warning message out to our nations before the tribulation begins so people who hear our warning have time to repent and escape the punishment?  

What a cruel joke to play on the people to only warn them of a punishment when they are already in the punishment and it is too late for them to heed the warning.

The Church needs to get the warning message out before the two witnesses.

Then the people will know that God was fair and will remember His fairness and love.  That is how we glorify God and hallow His name.

Let all who are Philadelphians in spirit pray that God will raise up a Philadelphia leader to fully follow the way of life of Mr. Armstrong and finish the work in the time remaining.

Does God Ever Work Through Rebellion?

During the time in Worldwide when changes were being made and Worldwide was going into apostasy and ministers and members were starting to leave to form other groups, a local pastor, who did not support the changes but was trying to hold his congregation together and stop people from leaving (apparently only till he was ready to leave), said, God does not work through rebellion.

I thought about this and realized, this is not always true.  God has worked through rebellion.  Not all rebellion is of God, of course, and often or even most of the time rebellion is inspired by Satan.  But God can and sometimes does work through rebellion to accomplish His purpose.  

Here is what may be the clearest example in the Bible.  When Solomon became unfaithful to God (1 Kings 11:1-10), God punished him by taking away ten tribes of Israel, but letting him keep Judah for the sake of David his father.

God spoke to Solomon about this.  

Notice:  "Therefore the LORD said to Solomon, 'Because you have done this, and have not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom away from you and give it to your servant. Nevertheless I will not do it in your days, for the sake of your father David; I will tear it out of the hand of your son. However I will not tear away the whole kingdom; I will give one tribe to your son for the sake of my servant David, and for the sake of Jerusalem which I have chosen' " (1 Kings 11:11-13).

God took away ten tribes from Solomon's son and gave rulership of them to Jeroboam.  God first told Jeroboam through a prophet what He was going to do.  This was a cause for Jeroboam rebelling against King Solomon.

"Then Solomon’s servant, Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephraimite from Zereda, whose mother’s name was Zeruah, a widow, also rebelled against the king.  And this is what caused him to rebel against the king: Solomon had built the Millo and repaired the damages to the City of David his father.  The man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valor; and Solomon, seeing that the young man was industrious, made him the officer over all the labor force of the house of Joseph.
   "Now it happened at that time, when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite met him on the way; and he had clothed himself with a new garment, and the two were alone in the field.  Then Ahijah took hold of the new garment that was on him, and tore it into twelve pieces.  And he said to Jeroboam, 'Take for yourself ten pieces, for thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: "Behold, I will tear the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon and will give ten tribes to you (but he shall have one tribe for the sake of My servant David, and for the sake of Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel), because they have forsaken Me, and worshiped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the people of Ammon, and have not walked in My ways to do what is right in My eyes and keep My statutes and My judgments, as did his father David.  However I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand, because I have made him ruler all the days of his life for the sake of My servant David, whom I chose because he kept My commandments and My statutes.  But I will take the kingdom out of his son’s hand and give it to you - ten tribes.  And to his son I will give one tribe, that My servant David may always have a lamp before Me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen for Myself, to put My name there.  So I will take you, and you shall reign over all your heart desires, and you shall be king over Israel.
   "Then it shall be, if you heed all that I command you, walk in My ways, and do what is right in My sight, to keep My statutes and My commandments, as My servant David did, then I will be with you and build for you an enduring house, as I built for David, and will give Israel to you.  And I will afflict the descendants of David because of this, but not forever" '.
   "Solomon therefore sought to kill Jeroboam. But Jeroboam arose and fled to Egypt, to Shishak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon" (1 Kings 11:26-40).

This came to pass.  Jeroboam and ten tribes rejected the rule of Solomon's son Rehoboam and rebelled, forming a new government over most of the tribes of Israel.

Was this "rebellion"?  Yes.  God calls it that in the passage I quoted above.  He said that Jeroboam rebelled.  "And this is what caused him to rebel against the king..." (1 Kings 11:27).  

Was this rebellion from God?  Yes.  When Judah was about to go to war against Jeroboam and the house of Israel to return them to Rehoboam and the line of David, God stopped them, saying, this thing is from Me.  "But the word of God came to Shemaiah the man of God, saying, 'Speak to Rehoboam the son of Solomon, king of Judah, to all the house of Judah and Benjamin, and to the rest of the people, saying, "Thus says the LORD: 'You shall not go up nor fight against your brethren the children of Israel. Let every man return to his house, for this thing is from Me' " '.  Therefore they obeyed the word of the LORD, and turned back, according to the word of the LORD" (1 Kings 12:22-24).

There are examples, especially in the New Testament, where those who obeyed God rather than man had to disobey or resist lawful authority, including the authority of the scribes and Pharisees who sat in Moses's seat.  This authority, like all authority, was ordained by God.

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God" (Romans 13:1).

"Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, saying: 'The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.  Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do' " (Matthew 23:1-3).

Though the authority of the scribes and Pharisees was ordained by God, the apostles disobeyed their command to not preach in the name of Jesus, obeying God rather than man.

"And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them, saying, 'Did we not strictly command you not to teach in this name? And look, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!'  But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: 'We ought to obey God rather than men' " (Acts 5:27-29).

Christ said that He did not come to bring peace but conflict.  

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword.  For I have come to 'set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law'; and 'a man's enemies will be those of his own household' " (Matthew 10:34-36).

In modern times, we can see many cases where there has been disagreement and conflict in the Church of God leading to separation.  Start with Mr. Armstrong's autobiography.  He was in frequent conflict with Church of God Seventh Day ministers when he attended with that fellowship, and they opposed him.  Eventually he separated from Church of God Seventh Day.  The separation started with a simple refusal to accept salary, but it became complete over time.  He taught things Church of God Seventh Day did not accept.  You could say he "rebelled" against them.  He certainly separated and did a work separate from them.

Many times since the death of Mr. Armstrong members and ministers have had to separate from a fellowship they were attending for reasons of conscience.  When Worldwide massively changed doctrine, ministers and members, for reason of conscience towards God and need to remain faithful to the truth they found in the Bible, left that organization, with ministers, supported by members, forming new groups.  Many of those groups still exist in one form or another today.

I was raised Catholic, but shortly after I turned 18 I found the truth in Mr. Armstrong's teachings, and I went out of the Catholic Church.  I came into Worldwide, then left that organization later to attend and support one of the Church of God fellowships which had formed.  Later, I went out of that fellowship, again for reasons of conscience, to support a fellowship I judged as more faithful to God and His work.  So several times I had to go out of an organization to remain faithful to God and his truth in the Bible.

Others have experienced the same kind of thing.  Not too long ago a fellowship formed of people leaving an organization for reasons of conscience regarding wearing of masks and not being able to sing in services.

I am not making judgments on the mask or singing issues.  I am pointing out that the members who left were doing it to obey God as they understood His word.  That was their motivation, as I understand it.

And we do not all think alike.  We each only know in part.  "For we know in part and we prophesy in part" (1 Corinthians 13:9).  

You might know something I do not know and I might know something you do not know.  We each only know in part.  And that can create disagreement.  There are right ways to resolve disagreements.  But we have human nature and sometime one side or the other (and sometimes both) makes mistakes.  If separation is necessary, it can be peaceful, but often, maybe mostly, it is not.

Paul and Barnabas separated over an issue.  "Now Barnabas was determined to take with them John called Mark.  But Paul insisted that they should not take with them the one who had departed from them in Pamphylia, and had not gone with them to the work.  Then the contention became so sharp that they parted from one another. And so Barnabas took Mark and sailed to Cyprus; but Paul chose Silas and departed, being commended by the brethren to the grace of God" (Acts 15:37-40).    

Did Barnabas sin by leaving Paul, or did Paul sin by going a different way than Barnabas?  I don't know, the Bible does not clearly say.  But they separated.

Was it God's will that they separate?  Maybe it was.  Maybe God wanted Barnabas to do something separate from Paul.

Did Jeroboam sin by rebelling against Rehoboam?  God does not say that he sinned by forming a new kingdom over the ten tribes.  Jeroboam did sin, but not in his rebellion against Rehoboam.  He sinned later when he changed the dates of observance of God's Feast of Tabernacles and when he worshipped false gods (1 Kings 12:26-33).  

God gave Jeroboam the kingdom.  His separation from the rule of Rehoboam was not a sin.  Notice what God said to Jeroboam.  "So I will take you, and you shall reign over all your heart desires, and you shall be king over Israel.  Then it shall be, if you heed all that I command you, walk in My ways, and do what is right in My sight, to keep My statutes and My commandments, as My servant David did, then I will be with you and build for you an enduring house, as I built for David, and will give Israel to you" (1 Kings 11:37-38).

My point is, there are times when it is God's will that there be a separation.  When that occurs with a minister employed by a COG fellowship, it may be a technical detail whether he quits or is fired.  That is less important than that he do God's will as best he understands it from God's word, the Bible.  Ultimately, it is Christ who employs him, not man.

I mentioned that many of us have had to go out of an organization to remain faithful to God.  This may happen more frequently with Philadelphians, because God gives a special assurance to Philadelphia that in the kingdom they will not have to "go out" anymore.  This implies that in this life, Philadelphians may often have to "go out".

"He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name" (Revelation 3:12).

Some may focus on who is right and who is wrong on a particular issue and say that, because the parent organization was right, those who left to form a new group were sinning.  But though we may make mistakes in our understanding, we must strive to obey God's will in our lives.  Whatever is not of faith is sin.

"But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin" (Romans 14:23).  To get the context of this, you can read the whole passage, Romans 14:1-23. My point is, we can make mistakes in our decisions and in our understanding of God's will - He allows us to make mistakes - but we must always be motivated to do God's will the best we can.  To deliberately go in a direction we think is contrary to God's will is sin.

Of course, much division, rebellion, and separation is indeed sin, motivated by our carnal human nature and inspired by Satan.

I am not advocating indiscriminate and frequent splitting and division.  We should try to live in peace with each other as much as possible (Romans 12:18).  Even if a separation occurs, we should desire that it be a peaceful separation, though that seems to be rare.  

But do not be quick to judge a leader or group or brethren who leave an organization because they feel they must leave to do God's will.  Someone who leaves may not be sinning.  It may be God's will to use a new group to carry out His will.

Some might say, it is OK for a minister to leave an organization for reasons of conscience, but he should not start a new church.

But that may be wrong.  An ordained minister of Jesus Christ, whether an employed pastor or an unpaid local elder, has a calling to the ministry.  God's callings are irrevocable.  "For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable" (Romans 11:29).  The context of that quote is not necessarily referring to the calling to the ministry, but I think the principle applies.

A minister has to shepherd the flock, as Christ commands.  He risks God's judgment if he abandons them.  If he can join another group, that can be an option.  But if there is no faithful group he can join, he may have to form a new group just to be able to serve according to God's will.

How does God call a person to some act of service?  Sometimes it is simply by commanding loving service by the word of God, the Bible, then showing the need, and then showing a person that he or she has the opportunity to fill that need.  This can be for anything, small or great.  A man or woman who sees the need in the congregation to serve or comfort someone, then acts on that opportunity, is practicing this.

Look at the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37).  The Samaritan probably knew God's command, love your neighbor as yourself.  He saw the need.  He knew he could fulfill the need.  So he acted.  God made His will known in that manner, and the Samaritan obeyed God's will.

Whatever we do, it should be motivated by love - love towards God and love towards neighbor.

Don't be quick to judge those who feel compelled to serve God apart from the group they currently attend with.  If that happens, it may be from God.

Those who leave a fellowship, even to join or start a new group or move to a long-existing group, may be acting in a spirit of rebellion inspired by Satan.  But on the other hand, they may be motivated by God's Holy Spirit, by His word the Bible, and by the principle of love towards God and neighbor to serve a need they see as unfulfilled in the fellowship they have been attending.  Only God can read their hearts.

Let God be the judge.

 

Estimating the Shortness of the Time

We do not know when Christ will return (Matthew 24:36, Acts 1:6-8).  And while we know that the tribulation will begin about three and a half years before the return of Christ, we do not know when the great tribulation will begin.

Is it wrong to estimate?  Is it wrong to have an opinion, even to share our opinions with others in a spirit of friendly fellowship and "iron sharpens iron"?  I don't think so, provided we don't take our opinions too seriously.  Christ did not rebuke his disciples for asking the question.  And we are admonished to watch and be aware.

But be careful how you estimate, because it can affect your attitude towards doing God's work of preaching the gospel and the Ezekiel warning to Israel as a witness before the great tribulation begins, while Israel has time to repent and escape.

No one needs to estimate how much time we have left, but if you do, try to base your estimate, firstly on God's word, but also on common sense and the current situation both in the Church of God and the world.  Base your estimate on sound, logical thinking, not on emotion or wishful thinking.

The shortness of the time left is not measured by the level of our disgust, repulsion, or fear concerning world conditions.

We can all say that the time is short.  Compared with 6,000 years almost up, even twenty years is "short".

But there is short and there is short.  I think the time is short, maybe ten or fifteen years to the tribulation.  That is short.  But others may seem to think we only have about one, or two, or three years left.  That is a different kind of "short".

Some may say that the tribulation leading to the return of Christ is "at the door", using Bible language.  There is a time when Christ says we should be aware that His return is "at the door" (Matthew 24:33, Mark 13:29).

But if you read what precedes that, you see that a lot has to happen that has not happened yet.

Some may say, things can happen quickly in today's world.  But how much can happen and how quickly?

There are natural events and there are supernatural events.  And there is the combination of those two.  

There are different kinds of miracles and supernatural action.  There are quiet miracles and there are unusual, spectacular miracles.

God can perform tremendous, unusual, spectacular miracles to speed things up, or allow Satan to speed things up through tremendous supernatural action.

But so far, that has not happened, not in Mr. Armstrong's work of preaching the gospel, not in the events of World War II, not since the death of Mr. Armstrong even to today.

Miracles do occur of course.  By miracle I mean God's supernatural intervention and action.  But those are quiet miracles mixed with natural processes.  Each of us, if converted, is converted as a result of miracles from God, both to call us and to convert us with His Holy Spirit.  Our conversion is the result of God's miraculous action.  So is our protection from Satan.

God performed miracles to open Mr. Armstrong's mind to truth in the Bible.  God performed miracles to help the work grow in the time of Mr. Armstrong, at about 30% a year for a time.  God performed miracles, I think, in giving the English-speaking peoples the victory in World War II.  God intervened to bring about the result He wanted.

But these have been quiet miracles, interspersed with natural processes and events, not unusual, flashy miracles that are obviously the result of supernatural cause and action, like fire coming down from heaven in the sight of many people, or like the parting of the Red Sea or the fall of the walls of Jericho.

I read somewhere about something Mr. Armstrong experienced in doing the work that illustrates this.  I don't definitely remember the source or the details, but it was probably in his autobiography.

Mr. Armstrong saw an opportunity to add a radio station.  But when he talked to them, they turned him down.  Then he realized he had neglected to pray for God's help.  So he prayed and went back, and this time, he was successful.

This is an example of what I mean by a quiet miracle.  It was obvious that God helped move the minds of the people at the station to accept Mr. Armstrong's radio program.  But there was also the natural process involved of Mr. Armstrong contacting them, making his pitch, and getting approval.

This sort of thing happens all the time when we pray for God's help and He helps us.

It is those kinds of miracles God has used to do His work in our modern time.  We go through natural human processes and activities, and God helps our effort to succeed.

And because normal human activities are involved, things take time.

The work for a time grew at 30% a year.  But even at that rate it took decades for the work to grow, and even after decades Mr. Armstrong never reached all of Israel.

I have, in a previous post, shared my estimate that the tribulation will not begin for about ten to fifteen years.  I base that on all that has to happen: Europe must become strong, the United States must become weak, and the gospel and the Ezekiel warning have to go out to all Israel, maybe about 500 million people.  God will perform miracles and take supernatural action to guide events, and He will allow Satan to move events supernaturally, but normal human processes will be involved, and this will take time.  Miracles and supernatural actions will be of the quiet type I described, working with human events to move things towards their fulfillment.

At least this has been my assumption that I based my estimate on.

But it doesn't have to be that way, and I realize it.  My estimate could be completely wrong.  Maybe the great tribulation will come as soon as a year.  I realize that.

But for that to happen would require truly tremendous supernatural intervention, something of the kind we have not seen in modern times.

Could that happen?  Yes.  I think it is unlikely to happen soon.  I don't see any reason why it would happen in the next one to three years.  Most likely, God will work out his plan the same way, with quiet miracles to guide events, that He has been working in the last one hundred or more years.  For a while, anyway.  When we get very close to the end, things will get more lively.  The beast and false prophet will arise, signs and wonders will occur to deceive the world, the two witness will receive power to perform miracles, etc.  

But we may not be near that right now.

So why do many think the time we have left is so short it is only about one to three years?

Some might say, "It is obvious.  Things can't go on this way much longer".

But is that sound reasoning?  Or is it based on emotion?  Is this just an emotional argument, playing on the disgust and repulsion most of us feel regarding the sins of this world, but not based on Bible prophecy, not logical, not the product of a sound mind?

Is it wishful thinking?

I said before that our estimate about how much time is left should not be based on our level of disgust about conditions in the world.  The truth is, things can continue as they are for a long time, even getting worse and worse, in stages, over a long period of time.

Can things get worse, much worse, than they are today?

We can still do a work through radio, TV, magazines, the Internet, and public meetings.

The United States is still one of the freest countries on earth.

We are legally free to own and read a Bible.  That can change, but it hasn't happened yet.  We can meet for services, in rented halls or in our homes.  We can use the Internet to stream live services.  We can publish websites and instructional material.  Parents can home school their children.

Things can get a lot worse, and probably will, over time.  Maybe in stages.  We might go on like we are for a few years, then things will get worse in some way, then another few years can go by, and then things can get worse again, and so on.  We are not near the bottom at all.

What is it exactly that cannot continue much longer?

The debt crisis?  Is a collapse of the dollar imminent because of our debt?  

The debt crisis has been getting worse for years, but it may continue to get worse without triggering a collapse of the dollar for a while.  No one really knows.  We see the problem, like a ticking time bomb, but the world goes on.  Part of the reason is that, while the US dollar is in danger, other countries and other currencies also have debt problems.  It is a worldwide problem, and the dollar is still the trading and reserve currency of choice for most of the world.

And if a collapse of the dollar is imminent, why isn't the price of gold going through the roof?  It goes up, but slowly.  It fluctuates around $2,700 a troy ounce right now.  More than a decade ago it was around $1,200 to $1,600.  That is not far from the normal rate of inflation for everything.  If the world market, knowledgeable investors all over the world, thought the dollar was about to become worthless, I would expect gold to be well over $10,000 an ounce right now.  It is not.

Even if the dollar collapses, life will go on.  There will be adjustments.  Some people will lose their life savings.  Many will suffer.  But some form of currency will be used as a medium of exchange to permit people to work their farms and factories, to produce goods and services.

Our guns will still work.  So will our oil wells, our coal mines, our aircraft, our ships, our railroads, and our highways.  Food will grow.  Things will be made.  People will still marry and have kids.  There will still be schools and universities.  The Internet will still work.

What else "can't go on like this"?

The war in the Ukraine?  It will continue till they settle it.  Vladimir Putin?  He will continue in office until he is replaced.

Abortion?  Abortion potentially can actually decrease, now that Roe vs. Wade has been overturned.  But if not, then it will continue.  It has continued for decades, it could continue decades longer.

Homosexuality and Lesbianism?  The pressure to accept those things can continue and even get worse for a long time.

Transgenderism?  Same thing.  Pressures to accept it can continue a long time, then get worse, then continue a long time after that, then get worse again after that.

What can block or obstruct God's plan if it continues much longer?  

Nothing.

Everything bad we see can continue a long time, and none of it will stop the fulfillment of end time prophetic events: the great tribulation, the Day of the Lord, and the return of Jesus Christ.

So how do we know bad things won't continue a long time?

Is it just our emotions?  We don't want it to continue, so it won't?  That is not the reasoning of a sound mind.

Here is my point.  Don't get too attached to the idea that we only have a very short time.  Yes, God can work it that way by very great miracles, but He may not, so don't assume He will.

Allow for the possibility that we may have more than a decade left.  Don't rule that out because of emotion.

Why do I focus on this?  We don't know, so if we don't know, why say anything?  Let each be content in his own opinion, and events will show themselves.

The problem is that many ministers and speakers seem to be convinced that we only have a very few years, and they are encouraging others to think the same.  They are starting to push the idea of a very short time.

What effect does that have on our thinking and behavior?

At first, it may seem good.  If time is short, only a year or two, then we may all feel extra motivation to overcome sin and draw close to God.  So we will all be motivated to get ourselves ready so we can go to the place of safety.

But the effect may be just the opposite.  Thinking that time is very short can keep some from the place of safety.  

I will explain.

I have said over and over that those who go to a place of safety will be the same ones who have an open door for the preaching of the gospel and the Ezekiel warning to Israel.

How does thinking we only have a few years affect our attitude towards the gospel?  How does it affect our willingness to make the sacrifices and pay the price to obtain an open door and go through it in order to finish God's work?

What will happen regarding the work of warning the world?

Three things are possible.

One, it will not happen.  We won't do it, and all the nations of Israel will go into the great tribulation without a warning.  I think this is unacceptable.

Two, we will do it by our regular methods, as helped by God, as Mr. Armstrong did, with updated procedures according to changing times.  But it will be human effort aided by God helping and doing quiet miracles behind the scenes as He did for Mr. Armstrong.  Maybe we will start small and grow at 30% a year, or 50% a year, but it will take time - it will take many years - to reach everyone.

Or, three, if God wants to wrap things up quickly, He can perform big, outstanding miracles to speed up the work.  Some minister in the Church of God may perform public miracles that grab attention, and the work can jump ahead in a big way, allowing us to reach hundreds of millions of people in a short time, maybe in a year.  God's message would be on all the news.

So which?

I think we can eliminate the first possibility, at least I hope so.  Shame on us if we don't do God's work, but I don't think God will allow us to fail to do it and allow Israel to be unwarned.

Both numbers two and three are possible.  Number two, doing a long work, is how God has worked so far in modern times, and it is how He worked with Mr. Armstrong.  It is the way that most involves the work of the Church of God.

But possibility three, while it gets the message out, least involves the work of the Church.  It becomes a matter of waiting for God to take miraculous action.  Until then, we sit on our hands.

Think about it.  If the only way the work will get done in a short span of time is by big miracles from God, then what do we need to do in the meantime while we wait for God to do such miracles?

If we only have a year or two before the great tribulation begins, then what is the point of starting websites, publishing a magazine, going on radio or television, paying for Google pay-per-click advertising for websites, or having public lectures?  If we only grow at 30% or 50% a year in a way similar to how Mr. Armstrong's work grew, what is the point if we flee to a place of safety in the next year or two?

Making the sacrifices to do a work only makes sense if we have enough years left for it to pay off.  One to two years won't cut it as far as what we can do now.  God can do big miracles, but if so, what do we do that is worthwhile until He does?

This is why it is dangerous for the work of God to get married to the idea that we only have one or two years, or even three, four, or five years.

Someone said, we should work as if it all depends on us, but pray as if it all depends on God.  But how motivated will we be to work as if it all depends on us if we are sure in our minds we won't have the time to be effective?

That is why I think that being sure we only have a very few years left can keep us out of the place of safety.  Thinking that time is short can diminish our zeal for doing our part in God's work.  We will think we won't have time to do anything very effective in reaching 500 million people who need a warning, so why try.  Why start what we cannot finish?  Better to focus inward, try to get ourselves ready, and wait for either God to perform big miracles to get the job done in a year or two, or let the job not get done at all.

If we think that way, we are unlikely to make the sacrifices to get the job done.  We will not seek a fellowship that is willing to change doctrine, learn new things from Christ and the Bible, and teach the membership to believe the Bible more than the Church, all of which are required to effectively preach the truth to the public without being hypocrites.  We will not make the financial sacrifices to support the work.  We will not make the sacrifices of time and effort.

As a result, we will neither be given nor go through a wide open door for finishing the work of warning Israel and the world.

And unless we repent, Christ will never give us the opportunity to go to a place of safety.

Yes, it's possible we may have only a year or two.  Actually, I am not sure if it is possible because there are details of prophecy concerning events that must occur, and I am not familiar with them - they may require three or more years.  But let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that it may be possible we only have a year or two.

But it is also possible we have ten or fifteen or so years left.

All I say is, don't be too sure it is only a few short years.  Don't marry that idea.  Don't commit to thinking that way.  And don't let that idea affect your commitment to doing your part to support the work of preaching the gospel and the Ezekiel warning to all Israel and to much of the world before the great tribulation begins.

Don't rule out the possibility of doing a long work, lasting many years, with steady growth year by year, with God's help, as Mr. Armstrong did.
 
That work should start now.

The Answer to a Riddle about Doctrine

Last post I posed the following riddle.

One person teaches something to another.  I'll call them Jim and John.  Jim teaches John two things, call them doctrine A and doctrine B.  Both are true.  John respects and trusts Jim and wants to hold fast to both doctrines.  But it is impossible.

The two doctrines are compatible.  They do not contradict each other.  Both are true or are presumed to be true.  But John cannot hold fast to both of them at the same time even if he wants to.  

Why?

I describe the riddle in more detail in the last post, if you want to read it.

The answer is, doctrine A specifically forbids anyone from holding fast to doctrine B.  John can agree with doctrine B because he sees in the Bible that it is true.  But he cannot commit to holding fast to it in the light of new Bible research.  John must keep an open mind regarding changes to doctrine B, always, in the light of new Bible research.  He must always be willing to change or give up belief in doctrine B if the Bible shows him he should.  Maybe he will never have to, but he must always be willing to.  He cannot close his mind to change according to the Bible.

This is what doctrine A requires.

So if John commits to holding fast to doctrine A, he must keep an open mind and a willingness to change his belief in doctrine B, for this is what doctrine A requires.  But if he commits to holding fast to doctrine B, then he has abandoned doctrine A.  That is why he cannot hold fast to both at the same time.  Doctrine A requires that he hold fast to the Bible when it comes to detailed doctrines, not doctrine B.

If doctrine B is absolutely in all points correct and true, John will never have to change anything.  But John must keep an open mind if he is to hold fast to doctrine A.  He must always be willing to learn new knowledge from the Bible, even if it requires changing his belief in doctrine B.

Truth doesn't change because truth is perfect.  But our knowledge of truth can change because our knowledge is imperfect.  "For we know in part and we prophesy in part" (1 Corinthians 13:9).  As our knowledge changes and becomes more accurate, we understand the truth more perfectly.

In the Church of God and its modern history, doctrine A is Mr. Armstrong's way of life, a way of life that he practiced as a lay member of the Church before he was an apostle or even ordained as a minister.  In fact, Mr. Armstrong practiced that way of life before he was baptized.  Loma Armstrong also practiced that way of life even before her husband did.  And thousands of radio listeners later practiced that way of life when they heard Mr. Armstrong on the radio say, don't believe me, believe God, and those radio listeners helped Mr. Armstrong build the Philadelphia era of the Church.

That way of life is the way of believing the Bible more than any man, any tradition, any church or church leader.  It is the way of being willing to learn new knowledge from the Bible and to be corrected by the Bible, even when that requires changing prior beliefs that are based on church authority or tradition.

In modern circumstances, it is a way of life that says, don't believe Herbert W. Armstrong, don't believe Mystery of the Ages, believe God, believe your Bible.

Of course, most of Mr. Armstrong's teachings in Mystery of the Ages are true because he learned those truths from the Bible.  One who practices the same way of life as Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong may not have to change any doctrines, or very few.

Maybe Christ wants to teach the Church of God new knowledge at this time, or maybe He does not.  That is up to Him.  But we must not close the door to Him.  We must not lock Him out.  

Christ is the Word of God in person.  The Bible is the Word of God in print.  The same Word.  Thus said Mr. Armstrong.  If you want to believe what Mr. Armstrong said, try believing that.  It's true.  Both Christ and the Bible are the Word of God, a perfect reflection of the Father and His thinking and His holy righteous character.  

When we commit to not letting the Bible teach us anything new or correct anything Mr. Armstrong taught, we are locking Christ out.  We are saying to Christ, in effect, "I don't care if You want to teach us anything new, we won't listen.  Keep Your new knowledge to Yourself.  We will not be corrected by You.  We will stick to what Mr. Armstrong taught, right or wrong.  Mr. Armstrong comes first, You come second.  When it comes to doctrine, stay outside.  Mr. Armstrong taught us everything we need to know".

Remember, I repeat, the Bible is the Word of God in print, Christ is the Word of God in person, the same word.  When we put the Bible in second place to Mystery of the Ages or any of Mr. Armstrong's other writings or teachings, we are putting Christ in second place to Mr. Armstrong.  That is idolatry.

People who do this will deny that they are making an idol out of Mr. Armstrong.  But they do, whether they realize it or not.

Do you think an idol-worshiper always knows he is worshiping an idol?  Not at all.

Tell a Catholic he is worshipping an idol when he bows down to an image of Christ.  "Oh, no," he will say.  "I don't worship the image, I am only using it to help me picture Christ when I pray.  I am using it to help me worship Christ."  But it is idol worship nevertheless.  He is breaking both the first and second commandments.  He breaks the second commandment by using an image in worship contrary to God's command.  And he breaks the first commandment by putting his desire to use an image first over obeying the one true God.  The image becomes more important to him than God, whether he admits it to himself or not.

Likewise, making a commitment to not change anything Mr. Armstrong taught, not having an open mind to learn new knowledge from the Word of God (Christ and the Bible) is putting doctrinal tradition ahead of God.

That is idol worship because faith is an act of worship.  

If we commit ourselves to never changing what Mr. Armstrong taught, we are exercising faith in Mr. Armstrong.  We are exercising faith to believe a man, even though we should know that all men are capable of sin and all men are capable of mistakes.

Does the Bible say to have faith in man?

The whole emphasis of the Bible is to trust and put our faith in God, NOT man.

In fairness, there is a scripture that says to believe God and His prophets.  "Believe in the LORD your God, and you shall be established; believe His prophets, and you shall prosper" (2 Chronicles 20:20).

But I believe this refers primarily to the prophets who wrote the Bible and to the first century apostles, both of whom wrote the Bible.  And God provided authenticity of the apostles' messages by public miracles, what the Bible calls the signs of an apostle (2 Corinthians 12:12).

While I think Mr. Armstrong was an apostle, he did not perform public miracles that anyone could witness and check into like the first century apostles.  Why?  Because today, because of the printing press, we have the Bible readily available, and because of fulfilled prophecy, we have the proof that the Bible was inspired by God and is God speaking.

So while servants of God can help us understand, as in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah (Nehemiah 8:6-8) and in the case of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:30-31), the only infallible communication from God today is through the Bible.

I asked this before, but if Christ wants to teach someone who says, I will not move on doctrine, how will He do it?  That person's closed mind excludes Christ.  He cannot learn what Christ has to teach him because he refuses to learn.  He locks Christ out.

But to Laodicea, Christ says, "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me" (Revelation 3:20).


What Is Philadelphia to Hold Fast To?

To Philadelphia, Christ says, hold fast to what you have (Revelation 3:11).  What is Christ talking about?  What is it that we have that He wants us to hold fast to?

One possibility was suggested by a speaker.  He said that the Holy Spirit is what we are to hold fast to.

Certainly we should hold fast to the Holy Spirit and our conversion.  We should not go back to the world.

But that is true for every era of the Church.  I think what Christ had in mind was something particular for the Philadelphia era.  What Philadelphians have is the example and teachings of Mr. Armstrong.  This doesn't apply to every era.

But which teaching?  The way of life Mr. Armstrong practiced and taught by his example as well as his words, or a detailed list of doctrines that he taught as a result of that way of life he and Mrs. Armstrong practiced even from before conversion?

That way of life says, learn new things and be corrected in doctrine from the Bible, and if necessary change tradition and the teachings of the Church.

So which is it?  What did Christ have in mind when He said, hold fast to what you have?  What does the "what you have" refer to, a way of life or a list of doctrines?

Is there a way to know?

Here is the whole message to Philadelphia.  "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write, 'These things says He who is holy, He who is true, "He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens": "I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie - indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you.  Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. Behold, I am coming quickly! Hold fast what you have, that no one may take your crown. He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.  He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches" ' " (Revelation 3:7-13).  

The question is, what is the "what you have", and to answer the "what" we will first find the "who" and the "when".

Who is the message for?  It is for Philadelphians, but the one person we can be sure has been a Philadelphian is Mr. Armstrong himself.  It is obvious that he was the leader of the Philadelphian era because he had the open door.

Also, the messages to the seven churches are addressed to and through the leaders of those churches, called "angels" (which means messenger as I understand it):  "To the angel of the church of Ephesus..." (Revelation 2:1), "And to the angel of the church in Smyrna..." (Revelation 2:8), "And to the angel of the church in Pergamos..." (Revelation 2:12), "And to the angel of the church in Thyatira..." (Revelation 2:18), "And to the angel of the church in Sardis..." (Revelation 3:1), "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia..." (Revelation 3:7), "And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans..." (Revelation 3:14).  

So the message to Philadelphia is primarily to Mr. Armstrong himself, and secondarily to those of a Philadelphia spirit and attitude both in his day and today.  It is to Mr. Armstrong that Christ says, I have set before you an open door.

Now the "when".  When does Christ say this to Mr. Armstrong?

1934.

It must have been in 1934, because Christ says, see, I have set before you an open door.  1934 was when Christ set an open door before Mr. Armstrong.

Of course, the message and the encouragement and admonitions in the message continued all during Mr. Armstrong's life and even after his death, even to today and the future for those who are Philadelphians in God's sight.

But it started in 1934.

So the "who" is Mr. Armstrong, and the "when" is 1934.

So now let's answer the "what".  What are we to hold fast to?  What do we have that we are to hold fast to?

Whatever it is, it must be something Mr. Armstrong had in 1934.  Christ said to Mr. Armstrong in 1934, hold fast to what you have.

Remember, the choices are, a way of life or a list of doctrines.

The answer is obvious.  Mr. Armstrong did not have a complete list of all the doctrines he was to teach later.  Much of the truth in Mystery of the Ages was not known by Mr. Armstrong in 1934.  But he had the open door and the command to hold fast to what he had.

So what did he have at that time?

He had A WAY OF LIFE.

He did hold fast to that way of life, that way of believing the Bible more than man or religious tradition.  And it was that way of life that produced a list of doctrines and all the truth in Mystery of the Ages over time.

Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong practiced that way of life from before conversion.  Christ told Mr. Armstrong in 1934 to hold fast to that way, and he told him through the message to Philadelphia in Revelation.

And Mr. Armstrong did hold fast, and we need to do the same if we are to be Philadelphians.  We must hold fast to that way of life of putting the Bible first and being willing to learn what the Word of God wants to teach us, even when it means changing our traditions.

Christ had harsh words for the Pharisees who put their traditions above God and His word (Matthew 15:1-9, Mark 7:5-13).


Was Mr. Armstrong the Elijah to Restore All Things?

There is one possible justification for holding fast to a list of Mr. Armstrong's doctrines.  That is the idea that Mr. Armstrong was the Elijah to come and restore all things.  The logic here is that, since he restored all things before he died, his teachings must all be correct.

I agree that Mr. Armstrong was no doubt the Elijah to come and restore all things.

But there are two ways he could do it.  Which way God used him to do it is important.

He could do it by restoring every truth and doctrine personally while he was alive.  Or he could do it by doing much of it himself but also delegating the way of life of restoring doctrine to others who would come after him.  In other words, Mr. Armstrong set something in motion that continues, or should continue, today.

He taught us that way of life by his example, as illustrated in his life, his work, and in his autobiography.  He taught us to let the Bible interpret the Bible and let clear passages interpret unclear ones.  He taught us by his radio message, don't believe me, don't believe any man, believe your Bible, believe God.  He taught us by showing us how to prove that the Bible is the word of God by fulfilled prophecy.

He taught us the meaning of faith, that faith is believing what God says.

So which is it?  Did Mr. Armstrong fulfill his Elijah role by personally restoring all doctrine himself, or did he do it by starting a process of learning new knowledge from the Bible which continues, or should continue, today?

Just like anything else, just as in understanding what Christ meant for us to hold fast to, we must look to the Bible for the answer.

Is there anything in the Bible that will tell us if Mr. Armstrong's role of restoring lost truth was completed by him personally or should continue today?

Yes.  We can find the answer by studying the life and work of the first Elijah.  He was a type of Mr. Armstrong, right?  God, who knows all things and knew from ancient times what answers we would need today has provided the answer we need.

God gave Elijah a job to do.  That can be likened to the job of restoring lost doctrine that God gave to Mr. Armstrong.  Did Elijah personally complete all aspects of the job God gave him before he was taken out of the way?  Or did he delegate some of it to Elisha who followed him after Elijah was gone?

God gave Elijah several things to do, but one of them was to anoint Jehu king of Israel.  "Then the LORD said to him: 'Go, return on your way to the Wilderness of Damascus; and when you arrive, anoint Hazael as king over Syria. Also you shall anoint Jehu the son of Nimshi as king over Israel. And Elisha the son of Shaphat of Abel Meholah you shall anoint as prophet in your place" (1 Kings 19:15-16).  

Later, Elijah was taken up into the atmosphere and Elisha received his office in his place.  "And so it was, when they had crossed over, that Elijah said to Elisha, 'Ask! What may I do for you, before I am taken away from you?' Elisha said, 'Please let a double portion of your spirit be upon me.' So he said, 'You have asked a hard thing. Nevertheless, if you see me when I am taken from you, it shall be so for you; but if not, it shall not be so.' Then it happened, as they continued on and talked, that suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire, and separated the two of them; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.  And Elisha saw it, and he cried out, 'My father, my father, the chariot of Israel and its horsemen!' So he saw him no more. And he took hold of his own clothes and tore them into two pieces" (2 Kings 2:9-12).  

Had Elijah personally anointed Jehu king of Israel as God commanded him?  No.  It was Elisha who did that after Elijah was gone.  Elijah must have delegated that part of his commission to Elisha.  He didn't do it himself personally.

Elijah did the job, but he did it by delegation.

"And Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of the prophets, and said to him, 'Get yourself ready, take this flask of oil in your hand, and go to Ramoth Gilead. Now when you arrive at that place, look there for Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat, the son of Nimshi, and go in and make him rise up from among his associates, and take him to an inner room. Then take the flask of oil, and pour it on his head, and say, "Thus says the LORD: 'I have anointed you king over Israel' ". Then open the door and flee, and do not delay' " (2 Kings 9:1-4).  The young man went as he was told and met Jehu in an inner room.  "Then he arose and went into the house. And he poured the oil on his head, and said to him, 'Thus says the LORD God of Israel: "I have anointed you king over the people of the LORD, over Israel" ' " (2 Kings 9:6).  

Actually, the job of anointing Jehu was delegated twice, once from Elijah to Elisha, and again by Elisha to an unnamed son of the prophets.

These passages about Elijah and Elisha were inspired by God.  God did not have to give us all these details, but He knew this could answer our question today.  I don't think you will find any other passage in the Bible about any other prophet where the prophet is given a commission that is fulfilled indirectly after he was gone.  But wait.  This just came to me.  Ezekiel could be another example.  He was commissioned to get a warning to Israel, but he could not deliver it personally. But he wrote the message in a book, and we read his book today and deliver that message.

Mr. Armstrong did not complete his job of restoring doctrine personally.  He started the process, and we are to continue.  Likewise, he did not finish preaching the gospel personally to all Israel, which needs the warning, but we are to continue that today.  He did some of it and the rest passes to us.  He started the process and showed us how to do it.  We must finish what Mr. Armstrong started just as Elisha finished the job that Elijah started and put in motion.

The subject comes up, what about Mr. Armstrong's role in turning the hearts of the fathers to the children and the hearts of the children to their fathers (Malachi 4:5-6)?

Did Mr. Armstrong do that?  Yes.  He set up summer camps and put a focus on the youth.

Do we not do that today?  Of course.  We focus on the youth as Mr. Armstrong taught us to do and as he practiced and set the example.  We continue his work of turning the hearts of the fathers and children to each other.

Some see that.  They see that we should focus on youth and have programs for them to continue to fulfill Mr. Armstrong's role in this.  We continue what Mr. Armstrong started.  Mr. Armstrong is said to have done it because he started it and taught it.  In effect, he delegated it to the Church of God.  He started the ball rolling, so the entire work is attributed to him.

Some see this in regards to the preaching of the gospel and the Ezekiel warning.  It was Mr. Armstrong's role and mission and we must continue it.

So why can't these same people see that we must continue the process of learning new things that Christ wants to teach us and thereby continue Mr. Armstrong's role as the Elijah to come to restore all things?  He did it in person when he was alive, and today he does it through those of us willing to put Christ and the Bible first.

We continue the work Mr. Armstrong started of turning the hearts of the fathers and children to each other with youth camps and other activities.  We continue the work Mr. Armstrong started of preaching the gospel to the world.  So why are we not continuing his work of restoring lost knowledge?

If we say regarding doctrine, Mr. Armstrong did it all so there is nothing for us to do, why don't we say that about the youth programs or preaching the gospel?  There is inconsistency here.  If I want to be harsh, I could call it hypocrisy.  But only God can judge people's hearts and intents and character.  I can only point out the inconsistency and the danger of hypocrisy, as a warning and not an accusation.

Yes, I believe Mr. Armstrong was the Elijah to come to restore all things.  But if we believe the Bible, we should be able to see that we should continue the process of restoring all things as Christ, the Word of God in person, teaches us through the Bible, the word of God in print, new doctrinal knowledge we did not have before.


Is This Post Causing Division?
 
Some will use the ideal of unity and the principle of not causing division to refute this whole post, no doubt.  But it is ironic when some who cry for unity have they themselves separated from a fellowship for reason of conscience.

We should strive for unity with God and the Bible, and to the degree we achieve unity that way, we will begin to have real unity with others in the Church of God.

The world can have unity against God.  The Pharisees had a kind of unity against Christ.  He condemned them for their hypocrisy.  Even Pilate and Herod became friends in the matter of the crucifixion of Christ, but they were enemies before (Luke 23:6-12).

Read Mr. Armstrong's autobiography and see how the Church of God Seventh Day ministers opposed him from the beginning.

Of course Christ wants unity among brethren, but He wants unity with God first.  And He didn't come to bring peace.

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to 'set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law'; and 'a man's enemies will be those of his own household' " (Matthew 10:34-36).

Satan is the accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10).  But God corrects, sometimes harshly.

Notice the strong language Christ used against the scribes and Pharisees.

"But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayers. Therefore you will receive greater condemnation.

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, 'Whoever swears by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple, he is obliged to perform it.' Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that sanctifies the gold? And, 'Whoever swears by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gift that is on it, he is obliged to perform it.' Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that sanctifies the gift? Therefore he who swears by the altar, swears by it and by all things on it. He who swears by the temple, swears by it and by Him who dwells in it. And he who swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by Him who sits on it.

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also.  Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, and say, 'If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.' Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?" (Matthew 23:13-33).

Notice, Christ asks, what is greater, the gift or the alter that sanctifies the gift?  Likewise, I can ask, what is greater, the list of doctrines Mr. Armstrong found, or the way of life he practiced that produced that list of doctrines?

Paul also corrected strongly.

"I could wish that those who trouble you would even cut themselves off!" (Galatians 5:12).

And God teaches us to warn those going off track.

"Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter" (Proverbs 24:11).  

"Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; therefore hear a word from My mouth, and give them warning from Me: When I say to the wicked, 'You shall surely die,' and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life, that same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. Yet, if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered your soul.  Again, when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you did not give him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand. Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man that the righteous should not sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live because he took warning; also you will have delivered your soul" (Ezekiel 3:17-21).

Some people are sitting on the fence, not ready to make a decision to believe the Bible more than tradition.  

But I think they will have to.  I think God will require it.


Why Is This Important?

This matter of being willing to believe the Bible more than our traditions and being willing to change our traditions is vital for preaching the gospel and the Ezekiel warning.

Judge for yourself, does God bless hypocrisy?  If we say to the public, don't believe us, don't believe your church, believe God, believe the Bible - don't we have to do the same thing?  God either gives us an open door or we have no open door.

If we play the hypocrite with the public, asking them to learn new things from the Bible while not being willing to do the same thing ourselves, I do not think God will give us an open door.  No open door, no warning the wicked.  If we don't warn the wicked, their blood will be required at our hand (Ezekiel 3:17-21).  Murder guilt may be upon us for those who die without a warning.  We will be guilty because we could have had an open door to warn them if we practiced what we preach, but because of our hypocrisy - our unwillingness to put God and the Bible first - we failed to get the warning out.  That makes it our fault - our responsibility - and God will hold us responsible.

Also, no open door, no place of safety, for the place of safety is only promised to the same group that has the open door.  If our hypocrisy keeps us from an open door, it will keep us from a place of safety.

Also, if Israel is not warned before the tribulation begins so they have time to repent and escape the punishment, they will not be warned for things they did not know were wrong, like Christmas, Easter, and pagan doctrines they think are Christian.  They won't see God's fairness in this when they are punished, and that will make it harder for them to trust God, to accept responsibility for ignoring the warning, and to repent during the tribulation.  That will make their salvation harder.  Some may lose their salvation permanently because of this.  This does not glorify God's name.

In the model prayer we ask that God's name be hallowed, but do we live it?  Do we glorify God's name and reputation by paying the price to get the warning message out.  That price includes being willing to change doctrine - the same price those who hear our message must pay to be converted and enter the Church.

We open ourselves to spiritual deception by not believing the Bible first.  God can remove us from the Church and bring in new people to replace us if we sin by disbelieving what we see in the Bible.

It is for ourselves, for those who hear our message, and for God's glory that we must do this.  Everything is at stake.

Each of us must make a decision to believe God more than our traditions and to be willing to learn new knowledge from the Bible.  We have to let Christ teach us.

If we say no to Christ, He may say no to us.  If we reject Christ, He will reject us.

Some say that the fear of God is not real fear - it is respect and awe.  But I don't see that in the Bible.  I don't think the translators made a mistake.  They know the words "respect" and "awe".  But they use the word "fear".  In the kingdom, we will have perfect love and there will be no need for fear.  But now, in the flesh, we better fear.  There is a time to be afraid of God, when we are tempted and have to make a decision between right and wrong.

"And I say to you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him!" (Luke 12:4-5).

Everyone will have to make a decision about this.  Each person will reap what he sows.

Let's make the right choice.