Preaching the Gospel

How Europe May Finally Unite

2012-01-02T15:43:00.004-06:00

With all the attention given to the growing unity of Europe, it remains a fact that Europe has not yet fully united. A "United States of Europe" doesn't exist. The beast power has not formed yet.

Europe is in no way ready to challenge the United States militarily. Not even close. The United States, though weakening, is still the most powerful nation on earth today.

Yet Bible prophecy predicts the rising of the beast power and the fall of the United States, probably in less than about two decades. And it is clear that the United States is weakening fast, mostly through economic problems and internal divisions.

I usually resist the temptation to speculate, except in my private thoughts. Not always. Maybe 5% or less of my speculative thoughts about the Church or the world make it into this blog. Like now.

How might a final, strongly unified European Empire form?

I think we can see clues in what has been happening in Greece and other weaker nations of the EU with their budget problems. They basically spend themselves into debt they cannot manage in order to provide "government benefits", or welfare, to the people, more in payouts than they take in in taxes (sound familiar?). And when government tries to cutback welfare spending, the people riot.

So here is a possible scenario.

The stronger nations of Europe, Germany and France for example, which basically have the power to control the Euro, tighten the rules to force smaller, less responsible nations to cut spending. They have to do that or the Euro will be ruined.

Germany will not allow the Euro to go down. It can't afford that. Germany wants a united Europe, and for that to go forward, there must be confidence, confidence in the idea of a united Europe and confidence in one European currency. If the Euro fails, that confidence is permanently damaged or destroyed. No one will be quick to trust the Euro or any other common European currency again, and the very idea of a united Europe will be harder to realize.

So Germany will require nations like Greece to cut welfare spending or leave the Euro-zone, and if they leave the Euro, they will still have to cut spending one way or another.

Now, under current circumstances, the strain may not be too severe. There may be some civil unrest, but it will be manageable.

But if there is a European and worldwide economic crisis, a severe recession or depression triggered, perhaps, by disruption of oil supplies from the Persian Gulf because of a war involving Iran, then hardship in some countries in Europe may reach the breaking point where rioting and internal division outpace the government's ability to manage them.

In that case you could have, in Greece for example, revolution, civil war, anarchy. If that happens, one or more sides may appeal to Europe to help to restore order and end human suffering and death, and Germany could send in the army. This would be a precedent that establishes a central European government, backed by a strong military, which would have real authority - authority backed by force - over individual nations in Europe. And if such an authority is successful, if it restores order, ends suffering, and brings a good result in the eyes of the people, that will tend to establish it firmly and permanently. There will be no going back after that. Independence of individual nations will be lost.

The World and the Church in the Year Ahead

2011-12-28T11:57:00.001-06:00

What's ahead in the world?

The last year and a half have been very eventful in the Church of God. Perhaps the next year will be quiet for the Church. Perhaps the big news in the next 12-14 months will be events in the world. I hope not. That is, I hope there will not be big news in the world. If there is, it is not likely to be positive. But I hope we have quietness and peace in the Church of God for a while. More events must yet happen, but I think we need a break.

There is an election coming in the United States. 2012 will be full of campaigning. That is known. But there are dangers on the horizon.

It really does look like Iran is close to making an atomic bomb. And it really does look like some kind of war with Iran may be close. If such a war comes, oil from the Persian Gulf could be disrupted and diminished, and gasoline prices would jump. That could further hurt a fragile world economy.

How fragile? Will a war crisis break the world economy? We may find out.

The Iran situation has developed slowly for a very long time. A war should be a surprise to no one. It has been much anticipated. What is unknown are the consequences. World history is full of examples of wars that were expected to be short, but turned out to be long. Men do not know ahead of time what war can bring. The whole world is like a trap ready to spring.

I saw some figures recently on the national budget deficit and debt. They were shocking. As much as I knew we have been spending ourselves into ruin, it was still shocking to me. It hit me in the gut. Why haven't we collapsed yet, I asked myself. How can we go on like this, even for another year or two? It truly is "scary" as they say. God's protection and mercy is the only hope of a Christian.

There are a number of interesting posts in Robert Thiel's COGwriter blog. Bob Thiel has posted numerous times about the Iran situation and our national debt. Here is a link to his blog:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/

The troubles the United States is in as a nation are troubles of our own making. We got ourselves into this mess through our own foolish decisions. Maybe half the country, or less, sees the seriousness of our condition, and the other half is blind to it. But almost no one outside the Church of God understands the true spiritual angle. About half the country sees that we are spending ourselves into oblivion. They see the solution as political. Elect leaders who will be conservative. Cut spending. Reduce the deficit. But they do not see their own sins.

The nation just finished celebrating a winter holiday that is said to represent the birth of Christ, but in actuality represents rebellion against God. Atheists and materialists often observe Christmas in a secular way, while many church-goers keep it for its religious meaning, but neither group seems to know how wrong it is.

About three years ago, the majority of American voters elected a president and Congress that is very "liberal", using the political label. That label represents a collection of views and policies that often come as a package. It includes massive government spending, and that spending is now ruining us. It is setting us up for a fall. The country is in a dilemma. Americans are addicted to a level of government spending far beyond what the government collects in taxes, yet the government cannot raise taxes without hurting the economy that generates those taxes. But members of Congress would be committing political suicide to cut spending as much as it needs to be cut. Every special interest group would say, "not us!" Not enough Americans grasp the need for sacrifice, for personal suffering now to avoid greater suffering later. Or, they see the need for others to sacrifice, but not "me", not "now".

So we drift (or race) into ruin.

Probably, at some point, there will be a severe worldwide economic crisis or collapse, then a recovery. The American economy would suffer the most during the collapse and come back the least during the recovery. When the smoke clears, the United States would be much diminished as a nation. Europe would lead the recovery and become strong.

There is one thing about all this that conservative Americans may see, but the liberals do not. When all our deficit spending catches up with us and we have to pay the price, the price will be have to be paid not just because our nation has elected politicians who massively spend us into debt, but because we have elected politicians who believe in abortion and other obvious immorality. It is the same group of people. In that sense, our own sins will punish us. By voting into office people who stand for allowing women to have abortions for any reason, for allowing men to have civil unions with men and women with women and call it "marriage", for promoting a godless agenda in the educational system, we have also elected into office people who spend government money at such a rate that we bankrupt ourselves. It is the same group of people.

Yet conservatives are not without sin.

While God may allow the liberals to be the instrument of our punishment, the whole nation, liberals and conservatives alike, is guilty.

The whole nation is guilty before God, but the religious segment of our society doesn't see their half of the guilt. I mentioned Christmas. The religious part of our nation thinks it is pleasing God by observing Christmas. I think Christ hates Christmas with a passion because it represents open disobedience towards God and a disrespect and disbelief towards God's word. But few people see that.

We in the Church see it. We know it is wrong because more than seventy years ago Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong started a work to preach the truth he learned from the Bible to the public, and most of us know what we know because he and others sacrificed to "preach the gospel to the world".

We now have the obligation to make the same kind of sacrifice to share that same knowledge with others in the United States who have not heard it before. We have to sacrifice just as Mr. Armstrong and Church of God members sacrificed in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s to get the truth out. If we do not, we become hypocrites if we claim to live by every word of God. The need is more urgent than ever.

That is why I am concerned when a Church of God fellowship so organizes and structures itself that it does not have the money it needs to do more than a very small work of preaching to the public. That can happen because it is overloaded with paid ministers who cannot be laid off because the leadership is committed to protecting their salaries in return for their votes.

Well, perhaps that problem could be solved. Many problems contain seeds of opportunity within them. The opportunity is that such a fellowship, having an abundance of professional ministers on salary, has the manpower to produce much published content in a short amount of time. Articles, booklets, and books can be produced. Then if, IF God chooses to empower that group to do a strong work of warning the United States and other nations, IF the leadership of that fellowship is willing to make hard decisions, then ministerial payroll can be cut, pastors' congregational responsibilities can be consolidated, and money can be freed up to publish and broadcast that content to a wide audience.

I think Church of God a Worldwide Association (COGWA) is on the right track to ask ministers and members to contribute content for preaching the gospel (Link to their announcement: http://members.cogwa.org/news/announcements-for-december-24-2011/). The leadership of that Church is wise to suggest collaboration between pastors who can provide strong content and others who have writing skills to shape and polish that content. They are starting an Internet work because that can be cheap, and right now that is the only way they can start.

If this opportunity is handled wisely, the coming year or two could be a golden era for COGWA in the production of content that can be published or broadcast.

My suggestion is that they use this opportunity to not just write short articles, but to follow that up with longer booklets and books and to write scripts for a TV or radio broadcast, even if the money is not yet available to publish printed literature or to record and broadcast radio or TV programs. Use the window of opportunity for writing while it is open - the money for using it may come later.

Consider also the copyright issue. There has arisen, within all the division within the Church of God, a tradition that is not good. Literature is written by ministers employed by a Church of God organization. That literature is copyrighted by the organization. Then, there is a split, many ministers and members leave that organization to start a new one, but they cannot use their own writings! The organization that has copyrighted them owns the rights and won't give "the other guys" permission to use them.

Yet these books, booklets, and articles really belong to God. They are produced with GOD'S tithe, and that tithe belongs to God. If you pray for God's help and inspiration in the writing and editing of this material, and Christ inspires your writing, He does it for the benefit of those who will read or hear the material, nor your benefit. The material belongs to Christ. It is not just for the benefit of an organization.

So why should its use be restricted?

Why should one Church of God organization use copyright protection to restrain another Church of God organization from using its material to publish the truth of God's word to a world that needs it?

So my suggestion is, consider putting some or all of this new material in the public domain, or consider a policy of allowing other Church of God organizations to use it to preach to the gospel to the world. Or, if you don't do that, consider how you would answer someone who says, "If this material is for the benefit of God's work and is intended to help people, why would you restrain others from getting it out to people so it can do them good?" Or consider how you would answer, "If God is financing and inspiring the writing of this content, doesn't it belong to Christ, and if so, should one Church of God organization prohibit another Church of God organization from publishing it to the world, which is what Christ wants anyway?"

It is a shame to the whole Church of God that we are so divided we cannot share copyrights for the good of new prospective members God is calling who need to know about the truth of God and for the good of the nations that need to be warned about the tribulation to come if they don't repent. And while many leaders in the organized ministry claim to serve Christ, their copyright policy is a witness that they are serving themselves.

The recent split between UCG and COGWA puts a spotlight on this whole issue. If UCG simply gave COGWA permission to use the body of literature copyrighted by UCG, but produced and paid for by many members and ministers now in COGWA, what would be wrong with that? What is the purpose of this material? Is it to help people outside the Church who have not been involved in our Church divisions and infighting? And who does this material belong to? Does it belong to Christ?

Look at Paul's attitude: "Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice" (Philippians 1:15-18). Did you get that? Paul REJOICED when others, even out of a spirit of envy and strife trying to hurt Paul, preached the gospel! Why? Because Paul was serving Christ, not himself. With that kind of love for the gospel, do you think Paul would have denied these people the right to publish his own letters if there were copyright laws in those days? I doubt it.

Come to think of it, COGWA might not really want that permission from UCG. Why? What would COGWA do with it? They do not have the money to publish. Right now, they have an excuse for not spending money on TV, radio, and printed literature and a magazine. "We have to produce content, and that takes time." But what would happen to that excuse if UCG handed them a whole body of literature on a silver platter? They cannot say the content is not sound, because the ministers and members of COGWA helped to produce it when they were in UCG just a short time ago.

I think COGWA would be on the spot. UCG would seem to capture the high ground morally and ethically because they would seem to be showing love towards others by sharing the right to produce the literature. The permission could contain the requirement that the literature would not be edited without the permission of the copyright owner (UCG), except the contact info (Church name and address) would be changed to the publisher who pays the expense of printing and mailing it (COGWA). Authors' names, when included in the literature as published by UCG, could not be removed. But in giving permission, UCG could force COGWA to explain why they are not publishing it.

Actually, LCG could make the same offer to COGWA. The doctrines are mostly the same, except for governance, and Church literature for the public rarely speaks about the governance issue. No major Church of God organization has ever done this. Any Church of God leader with literature compatible with COGWA beliefs could offer COGWA permission, and if he did he might shake things up a bit. What would COGWA say? "We can't publish it because we don't have the money?" Why don't they have the money? "We have too many paid ministers in proportion to our members?" Why do they have too many paid ministers?

I started this post about conditions in the world and prospects for the year ahead, and look where that led. Train of thought. One thought leads to another. Start with the national debt and end with copyright sharing in the Church.

Yet everything ties together. There is a direct connection between events in the Church and events in the world. It is all the same issue. A warning message and the true gospel have to go out as a witness to the American people and people of other nations, especially in Israel. Everyone in the United States should hear a warning so they know that the disaster that is coming is not just because some liberals have been elected but the WHOLE nation, conservatives also, are sinning against God. But the divisions in the Church make it more difficult to get that warning out. Governance is also a part of that same issue, because a governance that makes it hard for a leadership to make tough budget decisions, decisions unpopular with a voting ministry, also makes it harder to find the money to preach a warning message.

The Church of God needs to warn the American people that they are doing wrong and will face the tribulation if they do not repent. They need that warning so they will know God was fair to warn them while they had time to repent, and they need to accept responsibility for ignoring the warning. The more the Church of God follows God's Word, the Bible, in everything including governance, the more effective we can be in getting that warning out.

And if we fail to get the warning out because of our own disbelieve or disobedience, then the blood of the nation is on our own head (Ezekiel 33:1-6).

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Responsibility of a Watchman, Chapter 3

The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3

The Effect of the Holocaust, Chapter 4

My Comments and Conclusion, Chapter 4

The Two Witnesses and God's Fairness, Chapter 4

The Church, Chapter 4

Why the Gospel Must Still Be Preached to the World, Chapter 4

Church Government, Chapter 7

CHAPTER 8 - GOVERNMENT IN THE CHURCH OF GOD

A Key to Faith

2011-12-19T16:59:00.001-06:00

There is a need for more faith in the Church of God.

Many old-timers remember the atmosphere of faith that existed in the Church under Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's leadership in the 1940s, 1950s, and early 1960s, and even those of us who were not in the Church at that time are aware of the accounts of healings that took place. It seems there were many more healings in the Church at that time than now.

Mr. Armstrong had faith in God. He believed what God says in the Bible. He demonstrated that trust and belief in God's Word by giving up his own Sunday traditions and accepting correction in doctrine from the Bible. That attitude of willingness to believe the Bible more than anything else, more than his opinions, more than his traditions, and more than the teachings of any minister, was the foundation of Mr. Armstrong's faith. That is the way of life and of thinking that Mr. Armstrong practiced and it is the way of life and thinking he taught when he said, "Don't believe me, believe your Bible.

Mr. Armstrong always had a willingness to learn new knowledge from the Bible and to be corrected by the Bible, and it was because of that willingness that God was able to use him to restore lost doctrine.

I believe there is a direct connection between Mr. Armstrong's faith and trust in God's word, his willingness to change doctrine when necessary, and the healings that took place in those years.

Mr. Armstrong was willing to go, doctrinally, wherever Christ through the Bible would lead him (Revelation 14:4). He was more concerned with being faithful to teach the Bible accurately than he was about the reactions of human beings to the doctrines he taught. He was more concerned about what God thought than what man thought. He was not a people-pleaser. He was not trying to teach what the Church wanted to hear in order to build up and retain the largest possible number of members.

Since the death of Mr. Armstrong, some in the Church of God say with great emphasis that Mr. Armstrong was the Elijah to come (Malachi 4:5-6, Matthew 17:11), and they try to use that to say that Mr. Armstrong's doctrines can never be changed or added to, but in saying this they seek to overturn the most important doctrine Mr. Armstrong ever taught, that we must be willing to grow in knowledge and be corrected by the Bible. Some may think that our body of knowledge as a Church is complete and free of error, and that no doctrinal change is ever needed, but they forget that the Bible teaches that we know only in part (1 Corinthians 13:9) and that we are to grow in both grace and in knowledge (2 Peter 3:18).

When we preach the gospel, we ask the public to be willing to learn new things from the Bible. We have to be willing to do the same.

True faith comes from God, it is a gift, and we have our part to do also. We may ask God for the gift of faith, we trust Him to provide it, and we can seek God through prayer and fasting, which the Bible teaches. We also increase our faith as we exercise it, making right choices to believe and obey God when occasions arise.

And when we seek God with fasting, I think we would be wise to consider the teaching and positive example of Mr. Armstrong. He relates in his autobiography how he first began to fast when his wife Loma Armstrong was sick and when God was not answering his prayers for her healing. When he was fasting, he did not ask God for healing. Instead he asked God to show him what was wrong with HIM. He used fasting to humble himself so that he could more readily be corrected by the Bible, and he looked to the Bible, studying it while he was fasting, for the answer to WHY God was not answering his prayers for his wife's healing.

And after God corrected Mr. Armstrong and he received the correction, THEN God answered Mr. Armstrong's prayer for his wife's healing.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1

The Source of Our Beliefs, Chapter 6

Practicing What We Preach, Chapter 6

Changing Doctrine, Chapter 6

A Lesson from the Autobiography, Chapter 6

Faith, Chapter 6

How the Structure of Governance Affects Preaching the Gospel to the World

2011-12-15T15:20:00.000-06:00

In my last post, I did not mention that COGWA has determined which members of the board will be up for re-election in four years and which will be up for re-election in eight years, according to a post in James Malm's Shining Light blog. This was determined according to a random drawing, in accordance with the governing documents. The terms of service of the following board members are eight years:

Arnold Hampton
Richard Pinelli
Larry Salyer
Richard Thompson

The terms of service of the following members are four years:

David Baker
Joel Meeker
Leon Walker

Also, a little under 8.5 million dollars was budgeted based on estimated income.

Here is the link to the post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=5837

As I said in the last post, COGWA does not seem to have the finances at this time to do a large work of preaching the gospel to the world and get a warning message out to the nations of Israel. There is a connection between their shortage of money for the gospel and their structure of governance.

Here is a quote from my book, Preaching the Gospel, chapter 7, section "Church Government", pages 347-348: "There is a direct connection between hierarchical government and the ability of a church organization to make the sacrifices and the hard decisions necessary to preach to the public. I think recent experience has shown and is showing that if the human leader or leaders at the top of an organization, who have the authority to determine the budget and how much money is spent on preaching the gospel to the world and how much is spent on ministers' salaries, are themselves elected by the ministers, it is unlikely they will make the hard decisions necessary to allocate sufficient resources to really finish the work of preparing Israel for the tribulation. It is just common sense that many ministers will not elect someone who would reduce their salaries or lay some of them off if that were necessary." This statement was written several years ago, long before it became apparent to me or to most people that UCG would split.

And now, COGWA is becoming an example to illustrate the truth of that statement.

How important is it that we get a warning message to Israel about the tribulation to come if we as a nation do not repent?

It is vital that the people in our countries hear the warning BEFORE the tribulation begins. This isn't just for making new members. It is for showing the public that God is fair to give them a warning before He punishes them. It is for helping Israel to accept their responsibility for their sins and the resulting suffering that will come upon them.

Most of the people will not heed the warning. That is expected. But then, when they go through the tribulation, they will remember that they heard the warning. Most important of all, they will remember their own responses, that they laughed at it, became angry, or ignored it, but did not check up in the Bible with an open mind to see if the warning was true. And that remembrance will help them realize what fools they have been. That will be their first step towards accepting their own responsibility for their sins, which is a first step towards repentance.

But if they don't hear the warning, how will they react in the tribulation, and even afterwards in the millennium? "God wasn't fair. I thought I was doing the right thing by keeping Sunday, Christmas, Easter, and using holy pictures and images when I pray. No one warned me that I was doing anything wrong, so why should I be punished?"

How will people react in the tribulation if they have not heard a warning? The closest thing to the tribulation in modern history may be the Holocaust when millions of Jews suffered and died in Nazi concentration camps during and before World War II. If you haven't studied the Holocaust, you might think that suffering always draws people closer to God, but that is not true. Many Jews who were religious before the Holocaust lost all faith in God because they couldn't understand why a just God would allow it, according to survivors who actually lived in the concentration camps, as I have documented with quotes from survivors in chapter 4 of my book. That could be a picture of the attitude of distrust and resentment towards God that the tribulation will produce if our people hear no warning. We MUST get a warning out.

But could Mr. Franks make the tough decisions to consolidate congregations, to let some paid ministers go and let those who remain serve several nearby congregations, to free up 30% or 40% of the budget to do a powerful work of preaching the gospel to the world and giving Israel the Ezekiel warning before it is too late? I doubt he could do that to the very ministers who elected him and his supporters to the Ministerial Board of Directors.

That is the connection between the structure of governance in the Church today and the ability of the Church to get a warning message out that is so vital to Israel's repentance during the tribulation and their conversion in the millennium. And since Israel is to serve as a model nation in the millennium for other nations in the world, their conversion is vital for the conversion and saving of the whole world.

How important is that?

By making the board directly dependent on the approval of the ministry, and the president dependent on the board, COGWA has organized itself into a form in which its ability to get the warning out depends on the collective willingness of the entire ministry to sacrifice some of their own income. It may be that from God's point of view, not every paid minister in COGWA should be employed as a minister at this time, but neither Jim Franks nor any other leader of COGWA is in a position to take paid ministers off the payroll to finance the preaching of the gospel.

I fear that COGWA may become another COG fellowship that mostly just "feeds" itself.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

CHAPTER 4 - WHY PREACH THE GOSPEL?

CHAPTER 8 - GOVERNMENT IN THE CHURCH OF GOD

Church Government, Chapter 7

COGWA Headquarters Location

2011-12-12T19:34:00.002-06:00

In their recent conference last week, COGWA leaders were to choose a permanent location for their headquarters office. Although I have not seen or heard anything official from COGWA, James Malm has reported that the COGWA board has approved the Dallas/Fort Worth area as the location for a future headquarters office.

Here are links to posts in the Shining Light blog and COGwriter blog:

Shining Light blog:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=5837

COGwriter blog:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/cogwa-to-texas-but-dr-winnail-is-not/

Bob Thiel has also reported that UCG average US attendance in October was 7,621. Link:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-reports-statistics-etc/

COGWA has announced a new publication for its membership called, "One Accord", and Larry Salyer will be the editor. Link:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/announcements-for-december-10-2011/

I have also noticed that the members of COGWA's Moral and Ethics Assessment Committee have been named in COGWA's governance page. They are:
Mike Blackwell
Mike Hanisko
Les McCullough
Larry Neff
Paul Suckling

This seems to complete COGWA's organization. Here is a link to the page that lists all the members of the administration, the board, and the committees:
http://members.cogwa.org/organization-leadership

Where do UCG and COGWA stand right now? The actual split is past history and each group is making its own individual history from now on.

COGWA is fully organized. The leadership is in place and the headquarters location has been chosen. An entire holy day season has passed since COGWA started.

COGWA may not have the finances to do much of a work of preaching the gospel to the public right now. That can change if more members come to COGWA, but it remains to be seen if that will happen. Probably most members of the pre-split UCG have made their decisions and are unlikely to change in the near future barring some major event. The ratio of tithe-paying members to paid ministers in COGWA, particularly in the United States, may be too small to support a powerful work of preaching the gospel to the public. They can still do that work on a small scale of course, and I expect they will do as much as they can. They can easily do an Internet work with online publications and audio/video recordings and with pay-per-click advertising to bring readers and listeners to the webpages. They can do that on a small scale for now without the expense of a widely broadcast TV program and a large-circulation printed magazine. And if God blesses their effort, it may grow, bring in more donors, coworkers, prospective members, and members, and that growth may enable a greater work later, a work of a TV program or radio program broadcast to millions and a large circulation magazine. But that is a big "if".

UCG and COGWA have recently published Feast attendance figures, and those can be a guideline to membership numbers. In terms of membership numbers that can finance the preaching of the gospel, it is primarily United States and Canada figures that are most important.

While COGWA may have about half of the worldwide membership, they do not have half the membership in the United States. UCG has many more members in the United States, while COGWA may have more than half of the paid ministry in the United States. The split between UCG and COGWA is also a split to a degree between the majority of the tithe-paying members and the majority of the salary-drawing ministers, at least in the United States. To sum it up, most members stayed with UCG and most paid ministers went with COGWA.

What this means is that, while COGWA has enough money to pay its ministers, it does not yet have enough money to do more than a small work of preaching the gospel to the world. In contrast, UCG should have an abundance of money for that purpose right now.

Why have not more UCG members gone with COGWA, at least in proportion to the number of ministers who have done so?

A contributing reason may be that the membership has never heard a definite and plausible explanation for why the split occurred. If it appears that it is only due to personality differences and human carnality, they are less likely to leave one organization to go to another, especially if most of the members did not want the split to occur.

I have said before that the responsibility for explaining the root cause of the split, the underlying issues, lies with COGWA. The responsibility for the split itself may be shared between UCG leaders and COGWA leaders, but the explanation has to come from the COGWA leaders. They were the ones who quit. They may have been forced out to a degree, but they still have to explain why. UCG leaders are not going to admit they forced out those ministers.

I have imagined how I would explain the split to someone outside the Church of God who has not been familiar with the ongoing events of the past year and a half.

If someone asked me, "Why did the Church split?", I would have to say, "I don't know."

I know something about HOW the split occurred. This blog has chronicled some of the details of that. But not why. Not the underlying issue or issues that divided the leadership and ministry of UCG into two competing camps in the first place. The biggest surprise about all this to me has been that the ministry has managed to keep that under wraps even till now.

COGWA leadership might have good reasons for not saying right now. I won't speculate here about the reasons for the split or the reasons why the COGWA ministry has not said much about it publicly.

But even if COGWA is wise not to talk about it, they may be paying a price in lost membership. And that may spell trouble down the road when if it becomes evident that COGWA will simply not be able to grow the Church and get a warning message out to the public. Not all the members and ministers in COGWA will go along with that state indefinitely.

Here are links to related chapters in Preaching the Gospel:

CHAPTER 4 - WHY PREACH THE GOSPEL?

CHAPTER 8 - GOVERNMENT IN THE CHURCH OF GOD

Thanksgiving

2011-11-25T09:18:00.001-06:00

"Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men" (1 Timothy 2:1).

"Continue earnestly in prayer, being vigilant in it with thanksgiving" (Colossians 4:2).

Those of us in the Church of God and in the United States have much to be thankful for.

Thanksgiving is a national holiday in the United States, started as a tradition by those coming to this land who were thankful for God's protection and blessings.

Over the last two hundred years, the United States has been greatly blessed by God. We have more personal freedom, including the freedom to practice God's truth, than most nations of the world. We are still the most prosperous nation on earth. We are the most powerful nation on earth. God has worked things out in our history to make it thus. During the civil war, the nation was in danger of being split, but in the end we were united. God gave us the victory in World War II by intervening in many instances, I believe.

Yet the nation has been turning away from God in many ways.

It has been nearly 40 years since the Supreme Court decision known as Roe vs. Wade guaranteed that women would be able to have abortions, and since that time about 40 million or more unborn children have been aborted. Our public schools and secular colleges and universities are dominated by a godless, materialistic outlook that denies God's existence and creation, teaching that we came into existence through the random forces of evolution. Disrespect towards God and His name is a dominant characteristic of the entertainment of this country, the TV, movies, music, games, books, magazines, and websites Americans spend so much time with. Many people downplay the actual giving of thanks on Thanksgiving. They observe a day, but call it "Turkey Day" as if we are celebrating a turkey.

And the United States is beginning to lose its blessings.

We in the Church of God should not succumb to the attitude of unthankfulness around us. We have much to be thankful for.

Those of us who have jobs can give thanks for our jobs. Those of us who have families can be thankful for our families. Those of us who are able to attend Church of God services and enjoy fellowship can be thankful for those things. Those of us who are healthy can give thanks for our health.

We can all give thanks for the Bible and God's truth. We can thank God for opening our minds to understand His Word and His truth because so few people on the earth do. We can thank God for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ so that we can have the opportunity to enter God's Kingdom and live in joy and peace with God and Christ forever. We can even give thanks to God during our trials because we know that God works all things for our good in the end (Romans 8:28, Romans 8:18).

Let us always have an attitude of thanksgiving towards God for the blessings He has given us and will give us.

New Members of COGWA Board Elected

2011-11-07T05:39:00.001-06:00

James Malm in the Shining Light blog reports that the three new members of the Ministerial Board of Directors of Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA) who were elected to fill recent vacancies are David Baker, Arnold Hampton and Larry Salyer.

Here is a link to the post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=5420

UPDATE:

Here is a link to a page in the COGWA site that gives a summary of the offices and leaders who hold office currently in COGWA:
http://members.cogwa.org/organization-leadership

COGWA Announcements

2011-11-04T14:09:00.000-05:00

Church of God, a Worldwide Association has published a November 3 letter from Jim Franks in their website. There is not much news in it - I am waiting for an announcement of the results of the last election to fill vacancies on the Ministerial Board of Directors (MBOD).

Joel Meeker is the new chairman of the MBOD. He was a member of the board before, so he was not in the recent election.

The highest attendance for any holy day this year was 5,002 in the United States only. The estimate for total attendance at the Feast including an estimate of those who listened to the webcasts over the Internet is 5,300 in the United States and 9,500 worldwide.

The total of all holy day offerings in the United States this year is about $2,300,000.

Here is a link to the announcement:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/november-3-2011-member-letter

New Version of Preaching the Gospel

2011-10-30T23:11:00.001-05:00

I have recently published an updated version of my book, Preaching the Gospel. I have added a new section to chapter 6 on why ballot-box governance causes division in the Church of God, and I have added a new chapter, chapter 8, on government in the Church of God.

Here is a listing of the sections in the new chapter:

Chapter 8 - Government in the Church of God

Introduction

The Heart of the Issue

Two Principles of Bible Study

Moses

Exodus 18 - Leaders in Israel under Moses

The Difference Between Voting and Polling

Joshua

Samuel

Israel Asks for a King

David

Solomon

Rehoboam, Jeroboam, and Jehu

Elijah and Elisha

John the Baptist

Jesus Christ

The Twelve Apostles

Usefulness of the King James Version

Peter

The Replacement of Judas

The Appointment of Deacons

Paul

Resolving a Controversy - Acts 15

"If Two of You Agree..."

Instruction Concerning Appointments in the New Testament

Organization of the Church and Limitations on the Authority of the Ministry

Arguments and Answers

Other Problems with Using Balloting to Govern the Church of God

Clarify Your Thinking!

Root of the Church's Problem - Lack of Faith

The First 500 Trillion Years

2011-10-21T13:43:00.002-05:00

The Bible teaches us about the Millennium and the White Throne Judgment. God tells us that our life in the Kingdom of God will be eternal and the Kingdom will last forever (Isaiah 9:6-7, Luke 1:31-33). God also describes for us the New Jerusalem that God will dwell in on the earth (Revelation 21:1-4).

The Bible doesn't give us much information about what we will be doing in the eternity that follows. We know it will be joyous (Psalm 16:11).

It is as if God gives us descriptions of the Millennium, the White Throne Judgment period, and the New Jerusalem as an example of the kind of happiness and accomplishment we will enjoy for eternity.

God has allowed scientists in our time to discover many things about the universe. Scientists make mistakes, and some of the things they teach are wrong, but one thing I think they are right about is the vastness of the physical universe. The universe is much greater than is needed simply to provide the view we have of the sky with the sun, moon, and stars visible to our eyes. At most we can see a few thousand stars with our naked eyes. But there is much more than that.

The stars we see are suns, similar to our sun, very far away, and each can have planets orbiting around them, some perhaps similar in size and composition to our earth. Most of the stars we see are in the Milky Way galaxy as we are, and there are many galaxies. Scientists estimate there are perhaps about 100-200 billion stars in our galaxy and there are perhaps 100-200 billion galaxies in the known universe.

I want to speculate a little about what the Family of God might be doing after the White Throne Judgment.

Eternity is a difficult concept for the human mind to grasp, so I have chosen to consider only a tiny slice of time, a mere fraction of a second compared to eternity, a small period of time that our limited human minds can more easily grasp. Thus the title of this post, "The First 500 Trillion Years". That is easier to understand than infinity.

God is creator, and He is the author of life and beauty. The life that exists on earth in all its variety is testimony to that. It is likely that God will lead His Family to create life on other planets in this vast universe.

Christ may begin by teaching us in detail about the chemistry of life, the DNA code, and how to design and create new forms of life, giving us knowledge far beyond anything scientists presently know. Then perhaps we will start with the planets and moons in this solar system. Mars would need a richer atmosphere and might need to be closer to the sun. Venus has too much atmosphere and the wrong kind and may need to be farther from the sun. The gas giants have moons that may be able to be modified to support life. Christ may organize us into teams to work with these planets, creating life, and managing the ecology.

Once we have done that with the solar system, we may go out to do the same with all the solar systems in the galaxy, and after that, the same for all the galaxies.

There are enough stars in our galaxy for each one with multiple planets filled with life to be ruled and managed by one person born into God's family in the Millennium or White Throne Judgment. And after this, there are enough galaxies for each son of God to rule and manage an entire galaxy. God will see to it that we have the powers of mind and Spirit to fulfill our responsibilities. Our minds and our powers will be vastly increased beyond what we have today.

Those in the Church today, the first fruits, those in the first resurrection, will have the priviledge of dwelling in the New Jerusalem, the headquarters of the universe, with Christ Himself (Revelation 3:12-13, 21). He will share His joy with us (Matthew 25:21-23).

And through all this, the greatest joy will be the happy and loving fellowship and unity we enjoy with God the Father, Jesus Christ, all the saints, all those made sons of God and added to His family in the Millennium and White Throne Judgment, and all God's holy angels.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

God's Purpose for Mankind, Chapter 2

The Last Great Day Shows God's Mercy and Justice

2011-10-18T21:53:00.000-05:00

Satan the devil deceives the whole world during this 6,000 year age of man (Revelation 12:9). A meaning of "devil" is "slanderer" or "false accuser". He is the accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10). But he also accuses and slanders God. He does that by deceiving men with false religion into believing that God is unloving and unjust.

Most mainstream churches teach that to be saved, one must accept Jesus Christ in this life, and that this age is the only opportunity men will have for salvation. Yet the they know that throughout history, hundreds of millions of people never had the opportunity, due to time and chance and circumstances of birth over which they had no control, to accept Christ at any time in their lives, even to the time of their death. Yet according to the theology of this world, they are now condemned, never having been "saved" before they died.

Moreover, much of this same theology teaches that all men have immortal souls, and that those who are unsaved at the time of their death will suffer eternal torment in hellfire.

Talk about a monstrous idea!

But this is Satan's slander against God. He falsely accuses God of being cruel, by torturing men forever in hellfire, and unjust, by condemning those who have never had an opportunity to be saved. He also accuses God of weakness or incompetence, because he accuses Him of being powerless to bring salvation to all mankind.

So through much of this world's religion, Satan falsely accuses God of cruelty, injustice, or weakness, or a combination of these.

Mainstream churches never directly accuse God of these things. They will tell you that God is loving, just, fair, kind, all powerful, all wise, and all good. But those are words they say. They cannot believe those things deep down and still believe the traditional doctrines of their church about the soul, about hell, and about this being the only time of salvation.

The meaning of the Last Great Day shows that Satan's accusations against God are false, and the fulfillment of that day will clear God's name and glorify His reputation.

Ezekiel 37 describes the fulfillment of the Last Great Day. Everyone who has ever lived and never had a chance for salvation will be resurrected back to physical life. At that time, salvation will be open to all, and that includes those among men who have believed Satan's lies. They will find out that God is more loving, more just, wiser, and more powerful than they ever thought before. Those people will rejoice, and God's name will be glorified. People will be able to be re-united with their loved ones, and everyone will have a chance for salvation. I believe most people will choose God's way and enter God's Kingdom.

What a day that will be!

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Last Great Day - the White Throne Judgment, Chapter 2

The Millennium Prepares for the White Throne Judgment

2011-10-17T22:48:00.000-05:00

The Last Great Day represents the great White Throne Judgment, a time when most of mankind that has lived and died during the six thousand year age of man is resurrected back to physical life. Those in that resurrection will have their first opportunity to learn the truth without Satan around to deceive them. They can then choose to accept God's way of life and gift of eternal life or to reject it.

But this post is not about the Last Great Day. It is about the Millennium.

The general resurrection is described in Ezekiel chapter 37. "Again He said to me, 'Prophesy to these bones, and say to them, "O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! Thus says the Lord God to these bones: 'Surely I will cause breath to enter into you, and you shall live. I will put sinews on you and bring flesh upon you, cover you with skin and put breath in you; and you shall live. Then you shall know that I am the Lord.' " ' So I prophesied as I was commanded; and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and suddenly a rattling; and the bones came together, bone to bone. Indeed, as I looked, the sinews and the flesh came upon them, and the skin covered them over; but there was no breath in them. Also He said to me, 'Prophesy to the breath, prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, "Thus says the Lord God: 'come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.' " ' So I prophesied as He commanded me, and breath came into them, and they lived, and stood upon their feet, an exceedingly great army" (Ezekiel 37:4-10).

How many people have lived and died in the earth since mankind began? There are about six or seven billion people alive today. Perhaps there will be 20 or 30 billion or more in that resurrection.

Think about their physical needs!

What will they wear? What will they eat? Where will they live? How will they find homes? All the physical possessions they had in their former life will be gone. Will they have to start from scratch, living in poverty and squalor until they can build up farms for themselves? I don't think so.

God could miraculously provide everything. But it seems that God uses His servants including physical human beings to do what we can to do His work.

Isn't it likely that preparing for these people will be a job for mankind in the Millennium?

Clothing will have to be produced. Food will have to be saved and stored. Housing will have to be built. There are many things that will have to be done to prepare for the arrival of 20 billion or more human beings who will have nothing and will need everything.

There will be a lot of work during the Millennium to prepare for the White Throne Judgment period. But this work will actually be good for mankind in the Millennium.

God's way of life is the give way, the way of love and service towards others, and we learn by doing. Just as the Church learns to put into practice the law of love by working to bring the gospel message and the Ezekiel warning to the world now, so people in the Millennium will have the opportunity to practice the way of love by working to prepare to provide the necessities of life to those who come up in the general resurrection that follows.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Last Great Day - the White Throne Judgment, Chapter 2

Unity in the Bride of Christ

2011-10-14T02:33:00.003-05:00

One blessing of the Kingdom of God during the millennium and for eternity that I think we can well appreciate in this time of the scattered condition of much of the Church of God is the unity that will exist in the resurrected Church, the wife of Jesus Christ.

We, the members of the true Church of God, when resurrected will marry Christ. The Church of God is to be the bride of Christ. We, who are many, will collectively be that bride. Yet Christ will have ONE wife, not many wives (Revelation 19:7). How is that possible? We will be so united in purpose and love towards each other and so much of one mind to serve Christ that from God's point of view, we will be one, not many. That will certainly be true to a greater extent than now, but not only that, it will be true to a greater extent than has ever been true in the Church, whether under Mr. Armstrong's leadership or anyone else. That is because, for the first time, we will be perfect, without sin, righteous, not subject to the carnal pulls of the flesh, not subject to Satan's temptations. God cannot be tempted, and as full-born sons of God, we will not be tempted either (James 1:13).

Never again will we be divided. Never again will any of us give in to impulses of selfish ambition or disregard for others. We will love each other as we love ourselves. Never again will any of us sin by disbelieving what God says. There will be no heresy, no disagreements over doctrine, no divisions at all. Everyone will be perfectly fit and able to do the job and fulfill the office assigned to him or her with perfect love, wisdom, and competence. We will all be eager and willing to help any of us with advice, counsel, and cooperation. Those over us in authority will love us and we will love those under our authority. We will not lie to each other. We will be like God and Christ because we will be God's children and Christ's bothers and sisters. We will no longer have human nature, which is Satan's nature.

But we must be learning that way of life and that character now.

Jesus Christ wants one wife, not many wives quarreling with each other. Perhaps that is why He placed so much emphasis on love and unity in the Church now. He commands us to love one another (John 13:34-35, 15:12-17). He prayed for our unity not only with each other but with God (John 17:20-23).

"Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all thing" (1 Corinthians 13:4-7). "But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy. Now the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace" (James 3:17-18). These are good verses to especially keep in mind in our dealings with each other during the Feast of Tabernacles. This is a good time to practice them, and then remember the lesson during the year that follows.

It is that love and unity and fellowship that will help make our eternal lives joyous (Psalm 133:1-3).

We should strive for that love and unity now. But in the Kingdom of God, we will have that love and unity in its fullness for eternity. That is something we can look forward to.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Feast of Tabernacles - the Millennial Rule of Christ, Chapter 2

The Days of Unleavened Bread - Repentance, Chapter 2

God's Purpose for Mankind, Chapter 2

The Millennium Will Be a Time of Joy for God Too

2011-10-14T02:33:00.000-05:00

When we picture the millennium, we think of the happiness and joy that all humanity on earth will experience at that time. We also think of the happiness we as the spirit-born Sons of God and first fruits will experience being in the Kingdom of God.

But God the Father and Jesus Christ will also experience joy during that time.

How long has God the Father and Christ been planning to expand God's family? How long has God been planning to reproduce Himself? For thousands of years, certainly. For millions of years? For billions of years? Probably. For Eternity? Possibly.

And now, in the near future, it is finally about to happen!

For the first time in the history of the universe, the Family of God will expand to include more than just the Father and the Word who became Christ. The first stage of God's plan and purpose for mankind will have been accomplished. The first fruits will have been born by a resurrection from the dead or instantaneous change from mortal to immortal at the return of Christ. Tens of thousands of the Father's children will have been born (1 Corinthians 15:50-57, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, Romans 8:29, Revelation 14:1-5).

And Christ will enjoy the first one thousand years with His new wife in a marriage that will last for eternity. For the first time, Christ will have a bride that is like Him, compatible with Him, glorified as He is glorified, righteous, trustworthy, and faithful (1 John 3:1-2). There will be no divorce from that marriage. There will be no marriage problems. It will be a perfect marriage. It will be a gloriously happy marriage for eternity, and Christ will know it absolutely, and we will know it too. The resurrected Church will be that wife (2 Corinthians 11:2, Ephesians 5:25-32, Revelation 19:6-8).

Christ will for the first time in thousands of years be able to see Abraham again, and Isaac, and Jacob, Noah, Moses, David, and also the apostle He loved, John, as well as all the prophets and saints who have lived in the last 6,000 years, both those we know about and those we never heard of, and including all of us who make it into the Kingdom. Christ will be able to see all of us together. And He will give us our jobs and assignments and direct us in our work. He will have the pleasure of rewarding us and sharing His joy with us in a fuller measure than He ever could while we were mortal in this physical life (Matthew 25:20-23).

What a glorious time that will be for God, for Christ, and for all the saints.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Feast of Tabernacles - the Millennial Rule of Christ, Chapter 2

God's Purpose for Mankind, Chapter 2

The Difference Between the Kingdom of God and the Millennium

2011-10-12T00:02:00.002-05:00

Wednesday night at sunset begins the seven-day festival, "The Feast of Tabernacles", which pictures the Kingdom of God ruling over the earth during the millennium. The millennium is the period of time for one thousand years when Christ and the resurrected saints rule the earth (Revelation 20:1-9).

But the millennium is not the Kingdom of God. The millennium is a period of time lasting one thousand years. The Kingdom of God will go on forever.

The Kingdom of God is the government of God that will rule over the earth during the millennium, and it is also the family of God, or "God Family". Flesh and blood human beings living on the earth into the millennium will not be IN the Kingdom of God while human during the millennium, but they will be RULED BY the Kingdom of God, with justice and love. And they will have the opportunity to hear the true gospel, to believe the gospel, to repent, and to eventually enter into the Kingdom of God also. Salvation will finally be open to all.

The Kingdom of God will include Jesus Christ and all the resurrected saints made immortal and made full Sons of God. As part of God's family, we will live forever in power and glory and joy. With Christ we will rule the universe. The millennium is just the beginning.

God does not give many details of what projects we will be working on in the vast universe for millions, billions, or trillions of years into the future. But there is a great deal of information about what we will be doing in the millennium. We will be kings and priests helping Christ rule the nations on this earth (Revelation 1:5-6, 2:26-27, 3:21). And the Bible is full of information about what life will be like during the millennium, and much of this information will be related and expounded upon by God's ministers in Church of God Feast sites all over the world during the seven days of the Feast of Tabernacles.

It will be a period of great happiness, peace, prosperity, and justice.

God commands us to gather to observe the Feast of Tabernacles and to rejoice. We are to spend the second tithe we have saved for a year to enjoy food and fellowship that will help us to have a small foretaste of the prosperity and happiness that will exist all over the earth during the millennium (Deuteronomy 14:22-27).

There are really two aspects of the joy that the Feast of Tabernacles helps us understand.

One, there will be the happiness that will exist on the earth among mortal human beings when the nations are taught to obey all of God's laws. Satan will be put away and people will learn the truth about God's way of life that results in happiness. The Kingdom of God will teach mankind God's law and enforce peace and justice.

But also, we ourselves who will be IN the Kingdom of God and part of that Kingdom will experience a joy we can only partially imagine now. We will share in the power, glory, and joy that Jesus Christ experiences now (Matthew 25:20-23). We will live forever with no fear of death. We will finally be free of human nature and temptations to sin. And we can look forward to ever increasing accomplishments working with the whole vast universe that Christ presently rules. And this will go on forever.

During the Feast we will have many opportunities to enjoy food, fellowship, service, and fun that we do not experience during the rest of the year. But we should not get so wrapped up in just the enjoyment of the moment that we forget what that enjoyment is supposed to represent. It represents the happiness we will enjoy in the Kingdom of God and it represents the happiness mankind will enjoy during the millennium when the Kingdom of God is ruling the earth.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Feast of Tabernacles - the Millennial Rule of Christ, Chapter 2

God's Purpose for Mankind, Chapter 2

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God, Chapter 2

Atonement and Fasting

2011-10-07T16:24:00.001-05:00

Like many of God's holy days, Atonement is rich in meaning, and it has more than one meaning. It represents the putting away of Satan so he can no longer deceive the nations (Leviticus 16:10, 20-26, 29-31, Revelation 20:1-3). It also, like Passover, represents the sacrifice of Jesus Christ for our sins (Leviticus 16:7-9, 15-19).

There is an important lesson in the Day of Atonement about overcoming Satan and his influences. There is a connection made between fasting and overcoming Satan.

The Day of Atonement, the day that represents the putting away of Satan, is the only day God commands us to fast on. Fasting is an effective tool for overcoming the temptations and wrong influences that Satan uses to attack us and try to destroy us spiritually.

When Jesus went into the wilderness to face the greatest temptations that Satan could throw at Him, He fasted for forty days (Matthew 4:1-2, Luke 4:1-2). Though He was physically weakened by that ordeal, He was close to His Father in heaven. He was able to resist all of Satan's temptations.

When Jesus's disciples tried to cast out a particularly resistant demon and could not, Jesus said that this kind of demon can only be cast out through prayer and fasting (Matthew 17:14-21, Mark 9:17-29).

The lesson in all this seems to be that prayer and fasting are valuable tools for overcoming Satan, temptation, and sin. For as long as I have been in the Church, and I am sure before that, the Church of God has taught fasting as a valuable tool for drawing closer to God, and the Bible confirms this. Perhaps God has given us Atonement so we can experience fasting as an encouragement to fast regularly throughout the year as a tool for drawing closer to God and overcoming sin.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Day of Atonement - the Putting Away of Satan, Chapter 2

The Meaning of the Day of Trumpets

2011-09-26T11:38:00.003-05:00

We in the true Church are called to an understanding of the Bible and the true gospel that mainstream Christianity does not have. Perhaps less than one person out of 100,000 on the face of the earth has the knowledge God has given us. That knowledge carries with it a responsibility, and we will be judged by God on how we handle that responsibility. "And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more" (Luke 12:47-48).

We have to overcome and do God's will in our lives if we are to stand in the judgment.

We have the privilege of understanding the holy days. Not all even in the Church of God have that knowledge. Most in Church of God Seventh Day do not have that knowledge. Some mainstream Christians understand that the holy days have meaning, but they think they can understand that meaning without keeping the days. But God gives understanding to those who fear and obey him (Psalm 111:10). The commands to observe the holy days are in force for the true Church today (Leviticus 23:1-44, Matthew 5:17-19).

The Day of Trumpets represents several things. It represents God's direct intervention in this world to bring judgment upon the world for its sins. The next major event in God's plan is the great tribulation which comes primarily upon Israel as punishment for her sins, and we in the Church of God know that "Israel" includes the United States (the tribe of Manasseh) and Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa (the tribe of Ephraim). See Genesis 48:12-20. We do not know the exact date of the tribulation, but we know that it starts shortly before the return of Christ, which happens at the close of this age. We are nearing about 6,000 years of man's history, which will be followed by the 1,000 year millennial rule of Christ just as the seventh day Sabbath of rest follows the six workdays of the week (Revelation 20:1-6, 2 Peter 3:8, Genesis 2:15-17, Genesis 5:5).

After the tribulation comes the heavenly signs (Matthew 24:29), then after the heavenly signs comes the Day of the Lord (Joel 2:31). During the Day of the Lord are the seven trumpets, each signaling a disaster or series of disasters that strikes mankind (Revelation 6:12, 17, 9:1-21, 15:1). At the seventh trumpet Christ returns, and the saints, those in the true Church of God who overcome and endure to the end, will be resurrected, immortal, into God's kingdom to rule the earth with Jesus Christ (Revelation 11:15, 20:4-6, 1 Corinthians 15:51-52, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17).

This is the time we look forward to, and this should motivate us to strive to overcome and do God's will to the end. "But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ" (Philippians 3:7-8). "if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 3:11-14).

"Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified" (1 Corinthians 9:24-27).

"For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us" (Romans 8:18).

Yet this world with its materialism and its traditional religions is deceived by Satan (Revelation 12:9). Many, especially in the industrialized countries, believe there is no God, that this universe just exists by itself, and that there is no true hope of life after death. Many religious people believe man has an immortal soul that goes on to paradise or to punishment at death. But this Day of Trumpets teaches us that there must be a resurrection from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:16-19). The soul is mortal, and when we die we are unconscious, as asleep. But at the resurrection, God brings us back to life.

The events pictured by the Day of Trumpets are ahead of us, the next holy day to be fulfilled in God's plan for the salvation of mankind. When the fulfillment of that day comes, it will be too late for any Church members who have not prepared themselves and made themselves ready. We do not have an unlimited time.

Let us make the best of the time we have now to prepare ourselves so we can stand in that day without fear.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

The Day of Trumpets - the Second Coming of Christ, Chapter 2

New Appointments in COGWA

2011-09-16T15:24:00.003-05:00

In a September 15 member letter on the website of the Church of God a Worldwide Association (COGWA) Jim Franks announced several appointments to leadership positions.

The Ministerial Board of Directors (MBOD) approved Doug Horchak as operation manager for Ministerial Services and Clyde Kilough as operation manager for Media. Both of these men are members of the board, so they will have to resign from the MBOD to accept these positions. With Mr. Franks also having to resign from the board, this will create three vacancies out of the seven positions on the board. These will be filled by an election with all elders eligible to vote. The election will take place from September 19 through October 3. COGWA ministers will be receiving instructions.

The list of men who will be on the ballot was not announced in the member letter, but if I understand the governing documents correctly, the number of men on the ballot will be twice the number of positions to be selected by vote, so since three men are to be elected, there will be six men on the ballot. Those men will be the ministers who received the most votes in the last election to the board who were not elected to the board. In the last election, 7 men out of 14 candidates were selected, leaving 7 men who did not win election to the board. The six out of those seven who received the greatest number of votes will be on the ballot for election to fill the three vacancies.

The seven men on the last ballot who were not elected to the board are David Baker, Arnold Hampton, Mike Hanisko, Leslie McCullough, David Register, Larry Salyer, and Lyle Welty, so six of these men will be on the ballot, the one with the fewest votes not being on the ballot.

The board also approved the five members of the Doctrine Committee: John Foster, Bruce Gore, Don Henson, David Johnson, and Ralph Levy.

Members of the Moral and Ethics Assessment Committee (MEAC) are yet to be appointed, and Mr. Franks said that will probably not happen until after the Feast.

He also said that he expects the headquarters office to have a staff of about 8 to 12 people. Clyde Kilough, Dave Evans, Dave Johnson, and Jason Lovelady are members of a task force to study options for a headquarters location and are expected to present their recommendation to Mr. Franks within the next couple of months.

Below is a link to the letter:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/september-15-2011-member-letter/

Will United Church of God Liberalize Doctrine? - How to Prepare

2011-09-14T17:56:00.000-05:00

Is United Church of God getting ready to liberalize doctrine? Some believe that is happening. Some believe that a desire on the part of the current leaders of UCG to liberalize doctrine, to water down the truths of the Bible and of the Church of God, has been an important cause of the split. According to this view, now that the current leaders of UCG have strengthened their power, they will move to change doctrine, to move in the direction of traditional, mainstream Christianity as Mr. Tkach did in Worldwide, slowly and gradually perhaps, but in that direction nevertheless.

I personally do not know if this is true. It might be. There have been clues and hints, but so far no smoking gun that I can identify to prove the case. So this is a hard question for me to answer definitively. And I do not advocate any member of UCG leaving that fellowship just because of rumors that they may change doctrine in the future.

But I can answer how to prepare. If you are a member or attendee of UCG and you want to be protected from wrong doctrines, I think I know how you can prepare. The steps you should take are good steps to take even if doctrinal change does not take place, and they will help you see through any errors if change does take place.

If change comes, there will be a great effort to make the changes appear right. Many scriptures will be used to support the changes. That is how it was in Worldwide. There will be some truth and maybe some error mixed in. One point of truth that is likely to be included is the truth that we are to grow in grace and knowledge and be willing to be corrected by the Bible and learn new knowledge from the Bible. And that is a true and valid principle. UCG teachers may say that members should not be afraid of changes in doctrine if those changes are right and needed, and that is true. They may say that changes should not be rejected just because they are changes and sound different but that we should examine what the Bible says on the subject with an open mind, a mind willing to admit error and be corrected.

Nevertheless, the actual changes themselves might not be right.

So how can a member know? And how can a member be protected from deception in such a case?

This applies not just to members of UCG but all of us Church of God members wherever we may fellowship.

We have to know our Bibles. We have draw close to God in an attitude of meekness, humbleness, and willingness to believe God and the Bible more than man. And we have to put in the time to really study the Bible in an attitude of belief, to prove for ourselves what we believe and what we have been taught. This takes time. It takes time away from TV and entertainment. It is a sacrifice we must make if we want to be on solid ground. This kind of study can't be improvised suddenly at the last minute when you have to make a decision.

Prayer, meditation, and fasting can also help one draw closer to God.

Then if changes come, we will have the overall background in Bible knowledge, not based just on Church of God literature, but based on our own study of the Bible, and we will have the attitude and habit, built up over many months or years, of proving what God says and believing Him. With that attitude and background, we can examine any proposed change in doctrine in the Bible itself, and the Bible, which is God speaking, will tell us if the change in doctrine is true or false.

We have to apply the principles of Bible study that God Himself teaches through the scriptures:

"Test all things; hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

" 'Listen to Me, you who follow after righteousness, you who seek the Lord: Look to the rock from which you were hewn, and to the hole of the pit from which you were dug. Look to Abraham your father, and to Sarah who bore you; for I called him alone, and blessed him and increased him' " (Isaiah 51:1-2).

"For what does the Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness' " (Romans 4:3).

"And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, 'Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness' " (James 2:23).

"...just as Abraham 'believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness' " (Galatians 3:6).

"And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness" (Genesis 15:6).

" 'For all those things My hand has made, and all those things exist,' says the LORD. 'But on this one will I look: On him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word' " (Isaiah 66:2).

"But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:14-16).

"And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief" (Hebrews 3:18-19).

"You will say then, 'Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.' Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off" (Romans 11:19-22).

"It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Hebrews 10:31).

Notice that Jesus Christ said that faith is a weightier matter of the law. "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" (Matthew 23:23). Faith is more than believing God exists (James 2:19). It means believing what God says. And that is a matter of law, as this passage shows. It is a violation of God's law, one of the three weightier matters of the law, to disbelieve what God says, and therefore since sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4), to disbelieve God is sin. Notice that those who do not believe God will not be in the kingdom of God: "But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death" (Revelation 21:8).

It is a serious matter to refuse to believe the Bible in matters of doctrine. If I understand these scriptures correctly, you could lose your salvation if you disbelieve what God says. We all make mistakes, I do not say any of us will lose salvation because of sincere mistakes. But we better have an attitude that trusts God and His word to be true and is willing to believe God more than man.

There is one more point about being protected from deception, and I make this point in my book Preaching the Gospel. If we want to have God's help to have spiritual discernment so we are not deceived, we better be careful that we do not ourselves deceive others in anything. "Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap" (Galatians 6:7). Don't lie to anyone. In any situation, speak the truth or keep silent, but don't lie. If we lie and deceive others, God may let us become the victims of deception, letting us reap the consequences of what we sow. If you study the life of Jacob, you will see that after Jacob lied to his father to obtain a blessing, God let Jacob suffer many things because of how others lied to him. See Genesis 27:1-35, 29:18-25, 31:7, and 37:31-35. God let Jacob learn the hard way the consequences of lying. There may be a lesson in that.

Something to think about.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1

How to Understand the Bible, Chapter 1

Focusing on the Bible, Chapter 5

The Source of Our Beliefs, Chapter 6

Faith, Chapter 6

How Could Trained and Experienced Ministers Be Deceived?, Chapter 5

Jim Franks is President of COGWA

2011-09-02T09:43:00.002-05:00

The COGWA Ministerial Board of Directors has named Jim Franks as president, David Johnson as secretary, and Jason Lovelady as treasurer of COGWA. Here is a link to the announcement from COGWA:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/september-1-2011-member-letter/

Mr. Franks is a member of the board, and so will have to resign from the board before he takes office as president.

Of all the positions in COGWA, the most powerful is the presidency. The entire board is more powerful in the long run, but no one man of the seven men on the board is as powerful as the president. It is fitting that the most powerful position be filled by one who is judged as most competent and qualified, and since the ministers in electing the seven members of the board presumably voted for those they felt were the most competent and qualified, it is not surprising that the president would be one of the seven board members.

Clyde Kilough, Dave Johnson, Dave Evans, and Jason Lovelady have been named to a task force to research a permanent headquarters location and advise the president.

What still needs to be done is to name five members each of two committees (Doctrine Committee and Moral and Ethics Assessment Committee) and to name operation managers for departments such as ministerial services and media (preaching the gospel). Also, the vacancy on the board that will be created when Mr. Franks resigns to accept the presidency will have to be filled. The board can still operate with six members, but some decisions must be made by a vote of 5 ballots of all board members, so it may be important that the vacancy be filled relatively soon.

Qualifications for membership on the two committees include the requirement of 20 years of service as a minister, and for the Moral and Ethics Committee include the requirements that members be at least 60 years old and not members of the board. Members are nominated by the president and approved by at least five members of the board.

Operations managers are nominated by the president and approved by a simple majority of the board.

The vacancy on the board left when Mr. Franks resigns to become president will be filled by an election by the ministry. There will be two men on the ballot. As I understand it, those two men will be those two who received the most votes in the last election among those who were nominated but were not elected to the board.

To fill all these positions will take a few weeks, so it is understandable if this process goes to around the time of the beginning of the Feast. I would think that Mr. Franks will move quickly to nominate important operation managers and these can be approved by a simple majority vote of the board, which would require four board members voting to approve. Since at least four board members besides Mr. Franks approved his selection as president, it is likely those same board members will approve his recommendations for director of ministerial services, media director, etc. So I think these matters, which may be the most critical for the effective administration of COGWA, will be taken care of quickly.

The requirement that many decisions require approval by five out of seven members of the board will not be a major problem organizationally as long as there is general unity among the ministers in COGWA. Right now, that unity seems to exist. There is an apparent spirit of cooperation. This may be partly because of the recent trial these ministers have gone through together coming out of UCG, as well as a sincere desire on the part of many ministers to behave like Christians. A shared trial can create emotional bonds. But in the long term, if that spirit of unity and cooperation does not continue, it can be a problem. There can be deadlocks.

Suppose that four years from now when new members of the board are elected there is division among those on the new board. Suppose they are divided 4 on one side and 3 on the other on some important issues. How would they appoint a president when his present term expires, either re-electing Mr. Franks or electing a new man? Someone would have to compromise. If the division becomes as sharp as it was in UCG before the split, there could be a deadlock. Probably that won't happen for a long time, but it is a possibility.

But for right now, COGWA seems to be moving ahead with its organization. I expect the next announcements will be about the nomination and approval of the major operation managers or about the election to fill the vacancy on the board left when Mr. Franks resigns to assume the presidency.

More to come...

Listing of Church of God Blogs Now with Sortable Columns

2011-08-31T17:23:00.000-05:00

I have updated the Church of God Blogs website http://www.ptgbook.org/cog-blogs.htm with sortable columns. You can now group together all blogs listed affiliated with a particular Church of God fellowship, or all blogs by a particular author, or all blogs that accept comments, etc.

Currently I list about 24 blogs including two that are inactive but I list so that viewers can browse past posts. I hope to continue to expand the list as I discover more COG blogs. I do not list anti-COG blogs or blogs generally hostile to the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong, although some blogs may disagree with a few of his teachings. I list each blog name, URL link, the owner or author, which Church of God fellowship the writer is affiliated with (when I know it), whether the blog accepts comments or not, and whether or not the blog is a good source of Church of God news.

I provide this site so that Church of God members can read and exchange views with members and ministers in their blogs in the spirit of "iron sharpens iron" (Proverbs 27:17) and so that members can find sources of news about the Churches of God as well as uplifting messages from bloggers in their own fellowship and in others.

There is a handy link to this site in the sidebar of this blog to the right.

COGWA Election Results

2011-08-18T12:23:00.002-05:00

Seven men out of 14 nominated candidates have been selected for Ministerial Board of Directors of Church of God, a Worldwide Association by the balloting of the ministers (including unpaid local elders) of COGWA. Here are the men selected:

Jim Franks
Douglas Horchak
Clyde Kilough
Joel Meeker
Richard Pinelli
Richard Thompson
Leon Walker

The announcement dated August 17 was made in the COGWA website.

The next step includes selection by the board of a president. There will be other positions that will need to be filled in the administration, and members of a doctrine committee and an ethics committee will have to be selected.

The president cannot be a member of the board at the same time as he is president. But the board can choose one of their own members as president and that man then resigns from the board to accept the position of president.

My guess is that either Mr. Franks or Mr. Kilough will be named president, but this is just speculation.

Here is a link to the announcement:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/august-8-2011-ministieral-board-of-directors-results/

Victor Kubik has announced that UCG has appointed three new regional pastors. They are Vern Hargrove, Ken Martin, and Steve Nutzman. Link:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/new-regional-pastors-appointed/

More to come...

Could I Be Wrong About Governance? - Why I Believe Top-down Governance Is Better than Using Balloting

2011-08-04T12:10:00.002-05:00

Just for the record, I do not accuse any individual on either side of this controversy of deliberate idolatry in the way he understands the scriptures, and I hope no one accuses me of that. In the past, I have said that UCG as an organization seems to be making an idol out of their commitment to using balloting to select leaders, not because I think they are mistaken in their views, but because they seemed to be so committed to their governance system that they seemed to be unwilling to even consider changing it. But I usually try to avoid accusing particular individuals of anything more than making a mistake because I cannot know any man's heart as God knows the heart.

Anyone can make a mistake in understanding of the scriptures, and only God can judge a particular individual for his attitude, views, and teachings because only God knows the heart. We make a mistake when we become too harsh towards each other for our differences. I would not want God to be harsh with me when I make mistakes, so I try not to be harsh with others. There is a way to debate controversial issues honestly and with respect, and I try to have a right balance in that.

Could I be wrong about governance? Of course I could. I am human. Perhaps I misunderstood the Bible about something. But I want to strive the best I can to understand the scriptures and believe what I read.

If someone is to show me I am wrong, it will have to be through the Bible, through logic, or through historical information I can check up on or know about. God can also put me through experiences through circumstances that will teach me lessons and make me think about things with a fresh perspective. And God can use us to correct each other and teach each other, and I am always aware that God may show me something through correction from others, so when someone disagrees with me, I try to follow their logic and compare it to mine to see if I might be wrong.

But that is not just true about governance. It is true for any doctrine, the Sabbath, the holy days, the nature of God - you name it. My commitment is not to these doctrines, but to the Word of God itself. I only believe the doctrines of the Church as long as I see that the Bible teaches them, but if someone showed me something in the Bible I did not see before, my commitment to God to believe what He says requires me to compare it with everything else in the Bible with an open mind and believe what God says, even if it means I have to change my doctrinal beliefs. No one has shown me from the Bible that I am wrong about the Sabbath or any other major doctrine so far.

Over time, God will correct our mistakes to the degree we are willing to believe what He says, but sometimes that correction and our learning takes time and we should be patient with each other. None of us knows everything perfectly yet, so we should still be willing to learn new things, even from each other. "As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance of his friend" (Proverbs 27:17). See also 1 Corinthians 13:9-13, 2 Peter 3:18, 1 Thessalonians 5:21, Acts 17:11, and Proverbs 11:14.

The reasons I believe top-down governance is what the Church of God should have rather than using balloting to choose leaders is that I see many examples of God using top-down governance in the Bible, but no examples of God setting up a system of balloting, and the Bible seems to teach us that we should learn from the examples in the Bible and not just commandments. Also, I see the fruits of Mr. Armstrong's top-down governance, and it seems to be better and greater fruit than anything produced by a group governed by a system of balloting. I think the fruits of his leadership are good, in spite of his mistakes and shortcomings, because none of us would be here if it was not for the work God did through him. I might be persuaded that I am wrong about governance, but I don't know how anyone can do so except to show me from the Bible that a) we are to learn only by the commands of God, not His examples, or b) the examples of the Bible endorse balloting as much as top-down structure in God's government. Show me one of both of these, and I will reconsider my position. Or show me from the Bible some other way. But personal insults will not persuade me much, nor would I expect them to persuade those who disagree with me.

COG NEWS UPDATE:

Michael Hanisko has reported on COGWA finances in his COGWA – Beloit blog. Steve McNeely, a COGWA accountant, reported that June income was over $800,000, and income for the year so far is about $3,880,000. He also reports that COGWA has a reserve in the bank of about $1,430,000 and that just under $400,000 of that is reserved for preaching the gospel.

Here is a link to that post:
http://cogbeloit.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/sabbath-note-7-29-11

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

COGWA Announces Nomination Ballot Results

2011-07-31T14:05:00.000-05:00

Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA) has announced the results of balloting of career elders (paid with 5 years paid experience) to nominate 14 candidates for election to the Ministerial Board of Directors (MBOD). Here are the 14 men nominated:

David Lawrence Baker
Jim B. Franks
Arnold Jerome Hampton
Michael James Hanisko
Douglas Robert Horchak
Clyde L. Kilough
Leslie L. McCullough
Joel Christopher Meeker
Richard Robert Pinelli
David L. Register
Larry R. Salyer
Richard Conerly Thompson
Leon Walker
Lyle Eugene Welty

There will now be a ballot by the entire COGWA ministry (including unpaid local elders) to elect seven of these men to be members of the board. That board will in turn choose a president and other positions to help lead the Church. No schedule was announced for that balloting, but I imagine it will be finished before the end of August. Once that is done, I do not think it will take long for the board to name a president and other administrators. The board will also name members of two committees, a doctrine committee and an ethics committee.

Here is a link to the announcement:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/july-30-2011-governance-update/

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

UCG Is Changing

2011-07-26T19:51:00.002-05:00

Recently I read an article in the Journal by Dixon Cartwright about a question and answer session given by UCG leaders January 31 and February 1, 2011. I thought the article helped to give some insight into the state of UCG today and some clues as to where it may be headed. President Dennis Luker and ten members of the Council of Elders appeared before about 300 UCG elders and their wives and answered a variety of questions on such topics as governance, doctrine, reconciliation, and the split. Then men on stage included Scott Ashley, Bob Berendt, Aaron Dean, Bill Eddington, Roy Holladay, Victor Kubik, Dennis Luker, Darris McNeely, Melvin Rhodes, Mario Seiglie, and Robin Webber.

There was discussion of the situation in Latin America. Mr. Holladay said that about a quarter of original membership of UCG in Latin America has stayed with UCG. There was quite a bit of discussion about "servant leadership", and some of that may have been about the meaning of the term, though no clear definition seemed to come through. Aaron Dean said that income for the year is down about 35%.

Gary Petty spoke about reconciliation, saying that "we" failed at reconciliation. Bob Berendt said that since those who disagreed have left, there is a wonderful attitude now in UCG.

Mr. Berendt's comments about the wonderful attitude that now exists in UCG remind me of a trend in the Churches of God since the scattering of the Church after Mr. Armstrong's death, which I wrote about in my book (see section titled "Church Government"). Ministers in each group talk about the "wonderful unity" their group has, yet each group is sharply divided against the others. Each Church brags about its own unity while the whole Church of God is divided into fighting factions. Then a group, which brags about its unity, goes through a split. Then each of the fragments that is left brags about its own individual unity. Anyone remember United Church of God bragging about its unity since it formed, or after David Hulme left? Their very name, UNITED Church of God brags of unity. But they just split.

What is wonderful about UCG's attitude towards COGWA? But I think Mr. Berendt is talking about UCG's internal attitude towards itself, not towards other fellowships in the whole Church of God.

Hey, how about a merger between UCG and COGWA? After all, they have mostly the same form of governance and the same doctrines. Why not merge the two groups? (I'm only kidding.)

Shannon Lucas said that Satan caused the split and that UCG should not worry too much about the other side but rather UCG should just focus on their side.

Donald Ward spoke about governance and doctrine, saying that UCG has a dilemma. He mentioned that government was one of the most repeated doctrines Mr. Armstrong emphasized in the latter years of his life. I am not sure what point Dr. Ward was making. But he was not the only one who talked of government in the Church as "doctrine".

Howard Davis spoke of the superiority of UCG form of governance, saying that it is the God-inspired New Testament form of biblical governance, and that it should be articulated and raised to the doctrinal level. To me, he seemed to be saying that only UCG has the right form of governance.

Dael Baughman said that the current doctrinal review process is a hindrance to accepting new understanding, and that UCG should look at restructuring that process so that needed doctrinal change can be made. He seemed to say that doctrinal change has been bottled up in the past by two individuals. Melvin Rhodes said that one doctrine that has changed in the last 25 years is governance. Mr. Rhodes also encouraged elders who have suggestions for doctrinal change to write them up and submit them to the Council.

Mr. Luker encouraged audience response to some comments, in one case asking the audience to give someone a hand for saying she felt safe in UCG now, and in another case asking the audience if they would all say "amen" to a particular comment or question.

Here is a link to the full Journal article:
http://www.thejournal.org/issues/issue144/united-church-of-god-elders-ask-questions-of-council-members.html

UCG has changed and is changing. The split has changed it. It is a mistake to see UCG simply as a continuation of the group that started in 1995. This is not the same UCG minus a few dissidents. The United Church of God that existed five years ago does not exist today, under any name. It has been replaced by two new groups, the new United Church of God (UCG) and the new Church of God, a Worldwide Association, both of which are different from the old UCG. UCG members who have not realized this will, in time, see it. UCG will continue to change as time goes on.

There is a natural trend among people in general towards doctrinal liberalization, and this exists in the Churches of God as well as in the world. To resist this trend, there must be strong government. If a fellowship is allowed to drift, especially if it drifts in a direction popular with the membership, or if winning and holding members becomes a priority that leads the ministry to try to be popular with the members, that fellowship is as likely to move into liberalism as an apple is likely to fall from a tree. Right doctrine is not "natural" in that sense. Right doctrine must be actively and courageously taught, maintained, and defended, or it will be replaced by liberalism. Liberalism must be resisted, or it will gain ground.

If UCG leaders fight to maintain and defend right doctrine, and do not compromise, there will be no liberalization in UCG. But if they let things take their natural course, there will be.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

COGWA Governance Decision Wraps Up UCG Split

2011-07-17T13:24:00.002-05:00

About a year ago I reported that a split was beginning in United Church of God. The formation of a permanent governance structure for COGWA completes that split. There are now two Churches of God governed by the ballot box where there was just one before. Whatever the causes of the split, it was not disagreement about using balloting to choose leaders. The ministers of both groups agree that ballot-box governance is a good thing. As in cell-division, both groups inherit that common characteristic.

The split started when Leon Walker was fired by UCG because he would not cancel a trip to meet with the Council and the Council was not willing to wait till the end of his trip, though Mr. Walker had already met with representatives of the Council (Roy Holladay and Victor Kubik) and Jason Lovelady in Hawkins, Texas on June 15, 2010 to discuss the matters of concern.

The permanent governance structure of Church of God, a Worldwide Association was chosen by a vote of 138 to 10 of votes cast by elders choosing to vote. The option to nominate candidates for the board by the paid ministry and elect them by all elders passed by a vote of 82 to 66 over the option to have all elders nominate the candidates and to have board members selected by random drawing. This was a fairly close vote. Almost half of the ministry favored final selection by random drawing.

What I find more interesting is that ten elders did not agree with the proposal with either option. That makes me curious about what they had hoped for or what kind of governance structure they wanted.

If anyone in COGWA has not made a committed decision in his mind to permanently go with COGWA because he has been waiting to see how COGWA will be governed, he needs wait no longer. The actual balloting to select leaders must take place, but the structure is finalized. Most members and ministers can make their final decision on that basis. They may need time to seek God's will to know what to do next and prepare, but they now have the facts about COGWA's governance structure.

Now that the smoke has cleared in a sense, there is a greater need to explain the causes of the split. A split like this, with both groups having the same doctrines and the same basic ballot-box structure of governance, cries out for a better explanation than has been given by either side. And I predict there will be a certain restlessness among members until that explanation comes out.

Why did the split happen?

Is UCG really planning to liberalize and water-down doctrine? What is the real reason for the proposed move to Dallas, and what is the real reason why half the ministry apposed it?

COGWA governance structure is basically the same as UCG's governance structure. Some details have changed. Elections are not so frequent. The governing board is a bit smaller and the president is a bit more powerful. So what? In the context of this major split, so what? These are minor details. The basic structure is the same in both organizations. Ministers elect a board which chooses a president, and everyone has terms of office that end and require new elections or new appointments. The split cannot be over the size of the governing board, or length of terms of office, or how often there are elections.

Sooner or later someone will tell me why Dallas is important. Will it be the place of safety? Is there gold buried there? Is there a cryptic reference to Dallas in Bible prophecy that has not been published yet? Maybe it's important because it is close to Mexico. Or maybe it is important because it is close to Mark Armstrong. Is it easier to accredit a college in Texas? Did some minister receive a vision saying, "move to Dallas"? Do COGWA leaders have family there? Use your imagination. No one has talked yet. Maybe the proposed move to Dallas became a symbol or metaphor for a greater issue. If so, what did it represent?

I said it before and I will repeat it. A split like this cries out for a better explanation than has been given by either side so far.

Brethren have a right to want to understand this. They have a right to want to understand cause and effect. We have to understand cause and effect to learn lessons, and God gave us this physical life to learn lessons. Everyone has the right to ask what this is really about. The split is the effect. What was the cause? What was REALLY the cause? It is NOT just carnality.

Look, suppose a policeman sees two men fighting in the street and he wants to know why they were fighting. Each man points to the other and says, "he's carnal," and bystanders say, "they are both carnal." Does that explain anything? The policeman wants to know WHAT THE FIGHT IS ABOUT! In othe words, WHAT REALLY STARTED IT! What issue or disagreement are they fighting about?

Some bloggers like James Malm have stated what they thought was the cause, the issue that the split is about. But an explanation needs to come out of COGWA. It is not going to come out of UCG. UCG leaders may have forced COGWA ministers out, but they will never admit that. In the end, most COGWA ministers resigned, and the burden falls on that organization to explain why. If they were forced out, they must know why they were forced out. I am not talking about the mechanics of HOW they were forced out. I am talking about the root issue. Why did UCG leaders want COGWA ministers to leave?

Is splitting a large Church of God fellowship just "business as usual"? Are brethren to expect this sort of thing every decade or so as par for the course?

Brethren in COGWA have a right to ask this since COGWA has chosen a governance structure much the same as UCG's governance structure. And if that is a good governance structure, why didn't they remain under the authority of that structure in UCG? If you agree that the structure is good, then why say the results were bad? If you committed to support ballot-box governance in 1995, then why not accept the results and live under the authority of that system? If it produced good results, why not live under it? If it produced bad results, then why replicate it?

"Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit" (Matthew 7:17-18). Also, Luke 6:43-44, "For a good tree does not bear bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a bramble bush."

Did Christ guide the voting in UCG or not? If He guided it, then why not submit to it? But if He did not guide the voting, what assurance is there that He will guide the voting in COGWA? And if He does not guide the voting, then that organization is being lead by mere men, not by Christ. Is that what COGWA wants, self-rule rather than rule by Christ?

I know the same questions could be asked about top-down governance, what some call one-man rule. Surely, John Carmack would point that out to me.

One could ask, if the appointment of Joseph Tkach by one man, Herbert Armstrong, bore good fruit, why not stay with Joseph Tkach? And if it bore bad fruit, why replicate one-man rule?

The whole issue in both cases is: who decides who will lead and how does that decision become known? There is also the question of understanding the causes of a split.

In the case of Worldwide coming apart, many have talked about causes. I have written about what I think are the causes in my book, Preaching the Gospel. I do believe Christ inspired Mr. Armstrong to appoint Joseph Tkach as Pastor General of Worldwide Church of God. There is a reason why Christ did that. While the fruit was painful in the short term, it was necessary for the long-term good of the whole Church of God.

We do have one example in modern times of successful governance in the Church from the top down. There are no examples of successful ballot-box governance in the Church that I know of.

Christ taught that we should beware of false prophets and how to know them. In principle, the lesson applies to any leader in the Church, not just prophets. It can apply to apostles, prophets, evangelists, or any minister of any rank.

We know them by their fruits (Matthew 7:15-20). And the principle fruit to look for in a true servant of God is accurately teaching the truth of the Bible (Isaiah 8:20, Deuteronomy 13:1-6), and there may be other fruits also.

So you can evaluate a man like Mr. Armstrong. Thousands did as they listened to him on the radio and read his writings. They checked in their Bibles and saw that the fruit was good. They also saw that God gave that man unusual success in getting the message out and in building the Church of God. This showed that God had chosen Mr. Armstrong to lead the Church and do a work. God showed this by backing him up, just as God showed ancient Israel that Joshua was leader by backing him up (Joshua 3:7).

Likewise, thousands of Church of God members evaluated Mr. Tkach based on the Bible, and they found that the fruits of his teaching were not good. It was not Christ's decision or Mr. Armstrong's decision in appointing Mr. Tkach that was wrong. It was time for Christ to test the membership and put us through a trial that would shake many members out of their complacency. Most of us had become lukewarm. "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth" (Revelation 3:15-16).

I believe Christ led Mr. Armstrong to name Mr. Tkach as his successor. Mr. Armstrong did not know Mr. Tkach would overturn his doctrines. But Christ knew, and He wanted it this way to test the membership, to wake us up, to force members to deal with it. Many members had to turn to the Bible or they would be deceived. And many did become deceived and separated from those who believed their Bibles.

Why did the scattering of Worldwide occur? Why did Christ allow it? Those questions have been asked, and many have suggested answers, as I have. Those same kinds of questions should be asked and answered about the split of UCG. If they are not, the members and ministers will have doubts about both UCG and COGWA. As I say, there will be a restlessness, and tendency to wander, a lack of loyalty to either organization. There will be more splits. The more splits there are, the more there will be and the more members will distrust their ministers. Members are commanded to esteem their ministers highly (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13), but sometimes the actions of the ministry make that more difficult than it needs to be.

But there are differences between what happened in Worldwide 1987-1995 and what happened in UCG in the last couple of years just as there are differences in the structures of governance that were involved.

For those who believe the Bible, the need to leave Worldwide became obvious. Mr. Tkach was changing major doctrines that should not have been changed. Those who left had to leave. Nothing like that happened in UCG. Most members did not HAVE to leave UCG as we had to leave Worldwide.

With top-down governance, you can evaluate the top man according to the criteria the Bible sets, that is, the bearing of good fruit, the accurate teaching according to the Bible, and God backing up the leader as he backed up Joshua to know whom God has chosen. But how can you evaluate the leader when there is no leader? When authority is diffused in a ruling council with members of the council coming and going as they are elected into office and then elected out of office, no one is in charge. At any time, you can have a mixture of good and bad, and the authority resides in that mixture.

So the only way you can evaluate according to fruits is to evaluate the system itself. And the system or structure of governance that has ruled UCG has not borne good fruit, in my opinion. If the leaders of COGWA think that system has borne good fruit, then let them explain why that system produced a leadership that required COGWA ministers to leave, even though there was no major changes in doctrine that forced them to leave as happened in Worldwide.

You don't have to evaluate the structure of top-down governance by the fruits because God has already endorsed that structure with many examples in the Bible. But there are no examples in the Bible of a ballot-box structure of governance.

You want examples of successful top-down governance in the Bible and in the history of Israel and the Church of God?

Here are a few. Moses's leadership of Israel. Joshua's leadership of Israel. Samuel's leadership of Israel. David's leadership of Israel. Solomon's leadership of Israel. Christ's leadership of the twelve apostles while He was on earth. Paul's leadership of the preaching of the gospel to the uncircumcised and Peter's leadership of the preaching of the gospel to the circumcised. Mr. Armstrong's leadership of the Philadelphia era of the Church of God in our time.

Name one historical example of successful ballot-box governance in the Church or in Israel either in the Bible or in modern times.

UCG's governance structure is not found in the Bible. It was an experiment. And like any experiment, you have to evaluate the results. The results have not been good.

Now COGWA is repeating the experiment with some changes. They think they can get better results if a few details are tweaked. So elections will not be as often. The ruling board or council will be smaller. The president will have a bit more power.

Well, we'll see. This is ballot-box experiment number two. I do not think the long term results will be better.

Ten ministers in COGWA voted against that structure of governance. Others may also be against it, but did not vote. What will they do now? Perhaps some of those ten wanted ballot-box governance but with different details. Only those men know why they voted against the proposal.

The qualifications required of top leaders is clear in the Bible. The question is, who judges a man as to whether he has those qualifications? Who chooses the leaders? Does the decision come from above or below? That has been an issue since Satan led his angels in rebellion against God. Is it those who are ruled who decide who their ruler will be, or does or does Christ decide through His office as head of the Church. It cannot be both.

The only possible valid reasons to use balloting to choose leaders is if voting by those under authority to select the leaders over them is right in God's sight and if Christ guides the voting to put into office those leaders He has chosen. The only way to know if it is right in God's sight is by the examples in the Bible, and every example of godly governance in the Bible is from the top-down. There is not a single example in the Bible of God endorsing or setting up a system of regular elections year after year (or every four years or whatever) to govern Israel or the Church of God, but there are many examples of God appointing a man and showing by the fruits whom He has chosen.

I am not sure what the attitudes are about the election results in UCG and COGWA. There may be a difference between those two groups. Does one think that Christ decides and endorses all election results and the other thinks that the results of elections are merely the decisions of men? UCG leaders have said that those who disagree with them are disagreeing with Christ, and that their leadership is inspired by Christ as was their election. COGWA leaders do not agree with that. But what do they think? How would they explain it? That Christ does NOT inspire the election results? Then why have elections? I remember one minister saying something about the election decisions being collegiate decisions, or something like that, saying in effect that from the beginning of UCG there was not the belief that Christ inspires the voting to select leaders. If he meant something else, he did not explain it to my understanding.

So UCG leaders seem to claim that Christ inspired their election and that to disagree with them is to disagree with Christ, while COGWA leaders dispute that. But on the other hand, some COGWA ministers were upset with the overturning of the decision to move to Dallas because they thought that once the decision was made, it should not have been changed, implying the original decision was inspired by Christ. You can't have it both ways. Does Christ inspire voting or not? How can COGWA ministers say that Christ inspired the vote to move to Dallas but not the vote to rescind or the vote to elect the present UCG Council? How can they say it is wrong to second-guess the Dallas move but not wrong to second-guess the choice of Council members?

And if Christ inspires voting, why are results often split nearly in half? If Christ inspired a vote for Dallas, why was the vote so close, and why did Christ later reverse His decision? If Christ inspired the recent COGWA vote to approve the proposal for governance structure by balloting, why did ten ministers vote against it? Do they not also have the Holy Spirit? If Christ inspired the decision to choose option one for selecting board members, why did almost half of the ministers vote against it? And what are they to think now? "Well, I prayed for God to inspire my decision, but I guess God did not answer my prayer this time." You don't really have the kind of agreement that Christ talked about in (Matthew 18:19-20) or was the result of the meeting in Acts 15 when they were ALL in agreement.

When you set up a system governed by voting, you are making a commitment to support and abide by the decisions by the majority of men before you know what those decisions are, and there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that God works that way in His Church.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

COGWA Decides Permanent Governance Structure

2011-07-13T12:11:00.001-05:00

The ministry of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA) has chosen it's permanent structure of governance. The proposal for governance was produced by the Interim Governance Team and was approved by ballot by the COGWA ministry.

The Governance Plan, Constitution and Bylaws were approved by a vote of 138 to 10. Within that plan were two options for choosing the Ministerial Board of Directors. The first option was for balloting of the "career" ministers (paid with 5-years paid experience) to nominate 14 candidates, then the entire ministry (paid and unpaid) would ballot to elect 7 out of the 14 as board members. The second option was for nomination of 14 candidates by all ministers, then selection by random drawing of the 7 board members. The first option was chosen by a vote of 82 to 66.

So COGWA's governance structure has been decided. Their next step is to choose the leaders according to the governance process they have chosen.

See my post of June 30, 2011 titled "COGWA Proposed Governance" for a summary of COGWA's governance.

Here is a link to the announcement in the COGWA website:
http://members.cogwa.org/news/july-13-2011-governance-update/

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Should a Church of God Fellowship Be Incorporated?

2011-07-03T19:52:00.007-05:00

A corporation is a legal tool. But it is not the Church, and it is not even a church organization, and it should not be. A church organization should have precedence over the corporation. A Church of God organization, or fellowship, such as Living Church of God, Church of God an International Community (David Hulme), Church of the Great God (John Ritenbaugh), etc., really consists of the organized relationships between individuals in that organization, the common knowledge between members of what each person's role is, who has authority over whom, and the willingness to cooperate according to those commonly understood relationships. In other words, people in the organization know who is in charge and cooperate with that individual or individuals. The actual corporation with its articles of incorporation, its constitution, and its bylaws, is just a legal tool to serve the organization. It works best when it mirrors the organization as closely as possible, but it is only a tool. The organization can change it or leave it and form a new corporation.

An analogy is a man driving a car. He may own the car and there are several passengers in the car. They may be members of his family, or his friends, or church members. Maybe they are all on the way to the Feast of Tabernacles. And all the passengers agree that the driver and owner of the car is in charge of the trip. He is the boss. He decides when they will stop to eat, where they will go to eat, what route to take. Everyone understands that and they cooperate with the driver when he makes those decisions.

But the car is only a tool for making the trip. If it breaks down, or is stolen, the driver will replace it, maybe be renting a car, and the trip will continue. The driver is still in charge of the trip and everyone with him agrees with that.

In this analogy, the driver and the passengers are like a Church of God organization, a fellowship, such as Global/Living Church of God. The car is like the corporation. It is a tool of the organization, nothing more, not the organization itself. The car can break down, be discarded, be replaced, but the team consisting of the driver and passengers continues. Likewise, a Church organization or fellowship can continue even if it replaces the corporation that it used as a legal tool.

Just as a car provides advantages to a team of travelers over walking or taking public transportation, so a corporation provides advantages to a Church of God fellowship. It simplifies and facilitates business relationships in renting halls, printing and mailing magazines, purchasing television time, and many activities. It enables tithes and offerings to be collected with tax exempt status, which allows members to deduct what they contribute from their income, lowering their taxes. It can help to obtain lower postage rates from the post office for the mailing of magazines and other literature. It simplifies and clarifies copyright management.

But the corporation is not the organization.

Here is an illustration from Church of God history. When Mr. Roderick Meredith raised up Global Church of God around January 1993 (I do not have the exact date), he started a new Church of God fellowship. It started with only a few people but grew as more people coming out of Worldwide joined him. They had organization. The organization was the working relationship between Mr. Meredith and the people who understood that he was in charge of that new fellowship he raised up and respected and submitted to his authority in decisions relating to the work of the Church in that organization: feeding the flock and preaching the gospel to the public. Mr. Meredith made the decisions about which pastors to hire, what duties to assign to various people, how much money to spend on preaching the gospel, and what TV or radio stations to go on. That was the organization. Mr. Meredith called that organization "Global Church of God".

Global Church of God, led by Mr. Meredith as human leader, also built a corporation as a legal tool to facilitate the work of the organization. That corporation was also called "Global Church of God".

But what happened in late 1998 illustrates the difference between an organization/fellowship and a corporation.

In November 1998 several members of the corporation's board, including Larry Salyer and Raymond McNair, gained control of the corporation named "Global Church of God" from Mr. Meredith who had previously controlled it. It was no longer a tool that the organization under Mr. Meredith's leadership could use to do the work of the Church.

But they did not take control of the organization. The organization consisted of the leader of the organization, Mr. Meredith, and those ministers and members who recognized him as leader and worked together in an organized way.

So what happened? Mr. Salyer and Mr. McNair acquired control of the corporation and formed a new organization made up of about 20-25% of the ministers and members who had previously recognized Mr. Meredith as leader but now left Mr. Meredith to join Mr. Salyer and Mr. McNair.

But the organization consisting of Mr. Meredith and all those ministers and members who continued to recognize him as leader (about 75-80%) continued. For a few days they were without a corporation. But they were still an organization. Mr. Meredith had his rolodex, or personal phone book, and could work out of his home, calling ministers and members, giving instructions, and those ministers and members still knew he was in charge and cooperated with him in an organized way. The Sabbath after the takeover, congregations still met under Mr. Meredith's leadership. Sermons were given, the flock was fed, and for a few days the organization led by Mr. Meredith functioned without a corporation.

They formed a new corporation named "Living Church of God" as a legal and business tool to replace the "Global Church of God" corporation they had lost.

Another example of the difference between an organization and a corporation is the example of Worldwide Church of God during the California receivership in the 1970's. For a time, members were instructed to send their tithes and offerings, not to Worldwide Church of God in Pasadena, California, but to Herbert W. Armstrong, Corporate Sole, in Tucson, Arizona. This was a temporary expedient to ensure that the tithes and offerings would serve the organization when California temporarily controlled the corporation. But faithful ministers and members still knew that Mr. Armstrong was in charge regardless of what corporate umbrella was used or not used by him as a business and legal tool.

Should a Church of God organization or fellowship have a corporation? In most cases it is wise because a corporation is a valuable tool for doing the work of the Church. The problem becomes when people confuse the organized fellowship with the corporation. One is a team, the other is a tool. No one should have greater loyalty to the tool than to the team.

The whole Church of God is really the Church led by Jesus Christ as head. That Church is the collective body of everyone who is converted, every member who has dwelling in him or her the Holy Spirit and is led by God's Spirit. That is what Herbert W. Armstrong taught and that is what the Bible teaches. And at this time with the whole Church scattered and divided, there are many organizations (fellowships) within that overall collective body of converted human beings. Some organizations, some ministers who lead those organizations, are more faithful and do better work in God's service than others, and Christ is the judge. Each of those organizations, or fellowships, are organized in some way based on common recognition of roles and responsibilities of the ministers and members. And most of them have corporations as tools for legal and business purposes. That is not wrong, as long as the needs of the corporation never override the needs of the organization.

The corporation must serve the organization, not the other way around. When the corporation does not, it needs to be fixed or replaced (or abandoned or dissolved).

There can be another purpose of a corporation and corporate law from the viewpoint of civil authorities in this country. It may not necessarily be the purpose of laws and requirements for incorporation that the government wants to impose its ideas of organization on the Church. But the government has to be prepared for contingencies in case future lawsuits occur over control of the assets of a church. If a any church splits, which from the government's point of view is always possible, a civil court may have to decide who should control the assets, the bank accounts, the copyrights, the contracts, the office equipment, etc. They are not going to go to the Bible to figure this out, nor do we want them to because without God's calling they would not understand the Bible correctly anyway. The courts will go to the articles of incorporation, the constitution, and the bylaws to guide them in their decisions. They need that as a roadmap. That tells them what everyone agreed to when the corporation was set up.

To my knowledge, in all recent splits in the major groups in the Church of God, courts have not had to decide these things because we in the Church have at least obeyed God's command not to sue each other (1 Corinthians 6:1-7), but as far as the government knows, it can happen, so they require clarity in the documents that set up a corporation.

When the whole Church of God is spiritually healthy, we will all be in one organization as we were under Mr. Armstrong, OR, if there are several organizations, they will cooperate with each other like departments in a company with Christ as head over the whole company. When the Church is divided into hostile and COMPETING organizations, that is an indication that there is not spiritual health in the whole body. I don't mean that every fellowship is spiritually sick or weak, but many of them must be for there to be widespread division. It takes two to cooperate but only one to make war. The messages to the seven churches in Revelation show that the Church is not always spiritually healthy.

Christ is the personal head in matters of salvation and spiritual growth over every individual man and woman who is a converted Christian. He is the head over every Christian family in matters pertaining to the family through father of that family, the husband being the head, under Christ, over the wife in family decisions. And in matters pertaining to the work of the Church such as the feeding of the flock, the caring for the poor, and the preaching of the gospel to the world, Christ is the head over every organization or fellowship set up for that purpose, BUT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THE ORGANIZATION SUBMITS TO CHRIST'S LEADERSHIP. Because, just as an individual Christian or a husband and father of a family may be imperfect and may not always follow where Christ tries to lead, so it is with an organization. And Christ will judge the leaders of organizations for their choices to follow where He leads or not. Some who are found "so doing" the work of God faithfully will be told, "well done good and faithful servant", while others who eat and drink with the drunkards and beat up their fellow servants will be told, "you wicked and lazy servant" (Matthew 25:14-30, Luke 19:12-26, Matthew 24:45-51).

It is not wrong for a Church of God fellowship to set up a corporation as a legal and business tool as long as the leaders, ministers, and members never elevate the requirements of the corporation above the requirements of the organization to obey Christ.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Being More Loyal to God than to an Organization

2011-07-03T19:52:00.002-05:00

In COGWA's recently published document "Proposal for Governance" is a statement saying that everything in that Church's governmental structure and administration shall be subordinate to the requirements of the Bible. This is good, and it is a much-needed principle to state and to follow. This is something that should have been followed in UCG, but was not. For example, members of the Council of Elders in UCG apparently were required to commit to supporting the decisions of the Council in advance of knowing what those decisions were and whether or not those decisions were biblical. I do not know how much legal power this proposal carries compared to the constitution and bylaws, but I hope that COGWA and all its legal documents will support this principle.

According to some accounts given during the split between UCG and those ministers who left and formed COGWA, some Council members who did not agree with the majority on the Council felt they had to resign from the Council rather than stay to support those policies they felt were right because they had previously committed to an ethical policy requiring them to support majority decisions on the Council even though they did not feel those decisions were biblical.

What should have happened is that their commitment to support the decisions of the Council should have had the condition attached to it that they were committing their support ONLY in cases where the Council was in line with the Bible. COGWA ministers and members should likewise only be asked to make commitments to support this or that future decision of the leaders ONLY with the understood (and clearly stated) condition that their commitment to support decisions is only binding when those decisions are according to biblical principles. The Proposal for Governance makes a good start in this direction by its statement.

Committing or promising or agreeing in advance to support the decisions of fallible men is a trap because those decisions may be sinful and false. In principle, this may be included in Jesus's instruction not to swear to do something (Matthew 5:33-37), in the caution in Proverbs about being surety for someone else (Proverbs 6:1-5), and in the example of the man who vowed to sacrifice the first thing that came out of his house, being an example not to follow of someone making a commitment without knowing the full consequences of what he was committing to (Judges 11:30-35).

When we were baptized we committed to God and Christ to believe them, to obey them, and to seek and do their will in everything. That is the only commitment we need to make in the work of the Church. If we make that commitment and follow through to keep it, we will do the right thing and do not have to worry about making commitments to abide by and support the decisions of men in advance of knowing what those decisions will be, right or wrong.

More to come...

COGWA Proposed Governance

2011-06-30T13:11:00.000-05:00

The Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA), has produced documents describing their proposed permanent governance structure.

Should non-COGWA members of the Church of God be concerned about things happening in COGWA? Or is it none of our business what they do within their own fellowship?

"For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. For in fact the body is not one member but many....But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it. Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually" (1 Corinthians 12:12-27).

What happens in COGWA, or any other fellowship in the Church of God, should be of concern to all members of the whole Church of God, everyone who by reason of conversion through the receiving and indwelling of the Holy Spirit are members of God's true Church and the body of Christ.

Is what happens in COGWA really no business of non-COGWA Church of God members, whether members of other fellowships or scattered members not able to attend any fellowship at this time?

Should outsiders refrain from judging the decisions made by COGWA leaders, members, and ministers based on the principle that God will give wisdom and guidance to those who have the responsibility for making the decisions more than to outsiders who do not make those decisions? That is actually a good principle to keep in mind. We should be cautious about focusing on and judging the actions of others when we have no responsibility for making such judgments.

Yet outsiders have a stake in what is happening in COGWA. COGWA governance decisions potentially affect many Church of God members outside of that particular fellowship. For one thing, some of us have to make judgments about whether we can join or attend COGWA. Not everyone in the Church is in a satisfactory situation regarding attendance or membership with a COG fellowship. Some are looking for an organization to fellowship with and support. Some scattered members are at home on the Sabbath. Some need to make decisions about where to send tithes and offerings. Some attending other fellowships find that those fellowships are not serving their spiritual needs or are not faithful in their doctrines and practices, and those members may be looking for a better place to attend.

If a Church of God member needs a place to attend and support, if there is a COGWA congregation in his city, should he not be concerned about the state of COGWA? Does he not have a responsibility to judge those things he must judge to make a decision God has given him the responsibility for making?

We also have a mandate from God to love our brethren, and sometimes love requires correction and warnings about consequences of decisions, decisions that others make that could harm themselves. "Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter" (Proverbs 24:11).

The Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA), has made available to its ministers and members through its website three documents describing the proposed permanent governance structure of that organization. The three documents are, the Proposal for Governance, a Constitution, and Bylaws. There is a statement in the Proposal for Governance that states that the Constitution and the Bylaws should not be electronically transmitted to people outside of COGWA because they are legal documents internal to COGWA and not intended for the general public, so I will not comment on the details of those two documents. I find no restriction concerning the Proposal for Governance itself.

The governance documents were distributed to the entire COGWA ministry (unpaid elders as well as salaried ministers) to consider and vote on. They will be voting online and can vote between Monday, June 20 and Tuesday, July 12. The vote will decide whether or not to approve the proposed Governance Plan, the Constitution, and the Bylaws and also to decide between two alternative methods for choosing members of the Ministerial Board of Directors (MBOD).

The Long-Term Governance Committee, comprised of 18 men, did the initial work in producing the proposal for governance. In the proposal is a brief history of the steps that were taken in producing the three documents, which I will not cover here, and the Constitution and Bylaws were finally reviewed by Jim Franks, Ken Giese, Mike Hanisko, Doug Horchak, Clyde Kilough, David Register, Larry Salyer, Greg Sargent, Richard Thompson, and Leon Walker.

There will be a Ministerial Board of Directors consisting of seven men. They will select a president by a vote of 5 out of the 7 men on the board. The president will serve a 7 year term and can be reelected without any limit on the number of terms he can serve. The president will supervise the employees of COGWA and the ministry and serve as a spiritual leader of the Church. The members of the board will serve 8 year terms. Their terms will be staggered so that every four years there will be an election to elect 3 or 4 members of the board. The president may not also be on the board.

There will also be a Doctrine Committee composed of five men which will review doctrinal papers. It can propose changes to doctrine, but doctrinal changes must be approved by 75% of all elders who cast ballots. There will be a Moral and Ethics Assessment Committee (MEAC), also five men, which will handle charges of wrong doing. For both committees, members will be selected by being nominated by the president and approved by the board by at least 5 votes.

There is a distinction made between all elders and "career elders" or "career ministers". All ordained men credentialed as elders in COGWA are elders. Career elders are ministers currently employed by COGWA and who have been employed by COGWA or who have past employment experience in the Church for five years. This would include employment in Worldwide, United Church of God, or any organization that COGWA recognizes for this purpose. The distinction is important because some things can be voted on by all elders and some only by career ministers.

There are two alternative proposals for selecting board members, and COGWA elders will be voting on which of these two methods will be used as well as voting to approve the overall governance plan. In option one, career elders will vote to nominate candidates for the board. Each career elder may vote to submit seven names. To be nominated, an elder must receive 10% of the votes cast, and the top 14 names will be nominated. Then all credentialed elders may vote to select the 7 out of the 14 who will become board members. In option two, the nomination is the same except all credentialed elders can vote. But then, names will be drawn to randomly select 7 men out of the 14.

To produce staggered terms so that there will be an election every four years for about half of the board members, once the seven men are selected in this first selection, there will be a drawing to select 3 of those men to serve four-year terms and 4 to serve 8 year terms.

So basically, the governance will be similar to that of UCG, but with some differences. The main differences are that there will be longer terms, fewer elections, a smaller board, and more authority for the president and less for the board.

There are many more details in the proposal - I am just covering some main points.

This may reduce the politicking, and this governance structure may work better than UCG's governance structure has worked, but it is still government by men from the bottom up, in my opinion. This seems to be a proposal to make democracy work better.

When UCG started, ministers had little or no experience with voting and democracy. That first effort failed to preserve unity and may yet fail to preserve doctrinal integrity in UCG (time will tell). COGWA ministers seem to have learned some lessons from that and made improvements in the ballot-box structure they are using. It should work better. But I still feel the big lesson has not yet been learned. That will take more time and experience probably.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

When and How to Judge, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Pentecost Should Remind Us to Be Thankful

2011-06-09T17:12:00.004-05:00

Do you know God's truth? Do you know His plan for salvation?

How many people do?

If you add up the members of all of the Churches of God, plus some scattered members who are not able to attend any fellowship right now, you might come up with an estimate of around 60,000 people who understand God's truth. There are more than six billion people alive on earth. That means each of us is one out of about 100,000 people on earth who understands the purpose of life, why God made us, what God's plan of salvation is, how we fit into that plan, and how we should be living.

God is not trying to save all mankind right now. Satan is the ruler of this world, and God allows Satan to deceive the whole human race about the most important issues of life (Revelation 12:9). Only the few God calls and draws can come to Christ (John 6:44). The world as a whole CANNOT know the truth at this time. Their chance will come later.

But God is calling a few. That is a lesson of Pentecost. Jesus Christ preached to thousands, but only about 120 disciples were there when the Holy Spirit was given to the Church on the day of Pentecost after Christ's death and resurrection (Acts 1:15, 2:1-5). Those called in this age will be blessed to sit with Christ on His throne during the millennium to help Him rule the earth and bring peace, justice, truth, happiness, and salvation to all mankind (Revelation 3:21, 20:4).

We in the Church are the first fruits, the smaller early harvest as pictured in the Old Testament Feast of Weeks, the day known as Pentecost in the New Testament (Revelation 14:1-5, James 1:18, Romans 8:23).

Only one out of every 100,000 people.

Is that something to be thankful for?

We in the Church have an awesome opportunity. This is something to keep in mind in our trials. We should be inspired to be thankful for the blessing of knowing God's truth.

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Pentecost - the Gift of the Holy Spirit, Chapter 2

Pentecost is Unique

2011-06-07T12:57:00.004-05:00

Pentecost is unique among the holy days God's Church observes because it is also recognized and observed by traditional mainstream Christian churches. They do not understand the full meaning of the day, but they recognize it as a day to be kept by the church. They usually do not do much special on that day, but it is a Sunday, so for those who rest and assemble for services on Sunday it would also be a day of rest and assembly. Probably the main thing that would make this Sunday different for most Sunday church-goers is that they would hear some kind of sermon about the meaning of the day. That meaning would no doubt focus on the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the Church, but they would not understand the meaning of first fruits.

Pentecost therefore is a point of commonality between the Church of God and traditional mainstream churches.

The full meaning of Pentecost, if mainstream churches understood and taught it, would open up many important points of truth that most churches do not have. It would answer some questions that have plagued the churches - questions they cannot adequately answer, such as why are so few saved in this age, and what is the fate of the billions who never heard the name of Christ because of circumstances of birth over which they never had any control.

The truth that the Church is only the first fruits, as shown by the association of the Church being started and the coming of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost with the early spring harvest in the Old Testament, directly leads to an answer to the question, what happens to those who never had the opportunity to hear the gospel in this life. That question must bother many in traditional, mainstream Christianity, especially those who have loved ones who have died without ever becoming Christian. The full meaning of Pentecost provides that answer.

On the Church of God front, things are relatively quiet right now. That is probably good after the turmoil so many have gone through. There is not a lot of news concerning UCG, COGWA, or the other COGs, not in comparison with the nine-month period July 2010 through March 2011. It is good, especially during season of the spring and summer holy days, for members to be able to focus most of their spiritual energy on drawing closer to God and learning the lessons that God wants us to learn through the holy days.

There are issues and events that can come up in the future, maybe sometime after Pentecost. I watch for three possible developments.

COGWA has not yet come up with a permanent form of organization and governance. At some point, that will be decided and announced. They may publish a document on what the Bible says about government in the Church, as UCG did. UCG published their document long after they had already set up their governance. COGWA may publish such a document at the same time that they propose their permanent form of governance. It would make sense that a Bible study on the topic be done BEFORE making the decisions on governance, not afterwards. The decision on governance could be announced when the Bible study on government is published, with the understanding that the decision was based on the conclusions of the study.

Another issue concerning COGWA is the employment of ministers who were employed by UCG before leaving UCG to go to COGWA. There may be several ministers who were paid full-time salaries in UCG but who have not been hired by COGWA but are serving in COGWA as ministers. They are not being paid because funds are not yet available. If that is the case, this may become an issue. Ministers who work full time in the ministry should be paid for their work in the ministry. "Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel" (1 Corinthians 9:14). If a minister previously paid in UCG is serving full time but unpaid in COGWA, that minister may have financial needs not being met. In that case, in may be that some members who are aware of that need will offer that minister part of their tithes and offerings. It would remain to be seen how COGWA leadership reacts to that, because tithes and offerings paid to ministers directly from members, not through COGWA, would reduce the tithes and offerings coming into COGWA as an organization.

If COGWA tries to prevent the direct contributions of members to their ministers who are in need, then there could be ministers who feel forced to leave COGWA to organize independently.

Finally, it remains to be seen where UCG goes from here. There has been widespread speculation during the split that the leaders in control of UCG want to liberalize doctrine. Up until now, they have not had the power to do this. Now they have the power. If these speculations are true, I expect doctrinal changes and liberalization to occur, but slowly, gradually. But with a year or two at the most, changes would be evident, IF the leaders really want to change doctrine. If doctrine remains the same for the next couple of years, then I think the leaders never really did want to change doctrine in the first place.

I am working on a series of posts on the subject of governance in the Church, which I plan to start to publish in the near future.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Pentecost - the Gift of the Holy Spirit, Chapter 2

UCG Reports on General Conference of Elders

2011-05-16T17:47:00.001-05:00

Inside United Realtime blog (official UCG blog) has reported the results of the recent General Conference of Elders.

An amendment was approved that prohibits anyone from serving both on the Council of Elders and the management team. As a result, Mr. Aaron Dean and Mr. Victor Kubik are no longer on the Council of Elders. Mr. John Elliot will fill the vacancy left by Mr. Kubik. Mr. Roc Corbett will fill the vacancy left by Mr. Dean until July 1 when Mr. Donald Ward will fill that vacancy.

As of now, the members of the Council of Elders are:
Gary Antion
Scott Ashley
Bob Berendt
Bill Bradford
Roc Corbett
Bill Eddington
John Elliott
Roy Holladay
Darris McNeely
Melvin Rhodes (chairman)
Mario Seiglie
Robin Webber

On July 1, 2011, Donald Ward will take Roc Corbett’s seat.

There were a number of items voted on:
The 2011-2012 Strategic Plan was approved 226 yes to 8 no.
The 2011-2012 Operation Plan was approved 226 yes to 7 no.
The 2011-2012 Budget was approved 225 yes to 9 no.
Roy Holladay was ratified to retain his seat on the Council of Elders 205 yes to 28 no.
An amendment to Bylaws section 8.4.3 was adopted 205 yes to 28 no.
An amendment to Bylaws section 9.1 and 9.2 was adopted 201 yes to 29 no.

This gives a good picture of how the split has effected voting. The total number of ministers voting (230 to 234) is about half or less of the total voting before the split. So either UCG has lost half of its total number of ministers, or there is a higher percentage of ministers choosing not to vote than in the past.

Also, issues proposed were approved by overwhelming margins, unlike votes before the split when proposals were approved or defeated by narrow margins.

So the effect of split is that the ruling Council of Elders has a clear majority of the voting ministers approving their proposals, and this gives them more power and freedom of action. The Council governs a smaller church, but they have more control than they did before.

There are three related posts that report on these and other GCE matters in detail in the UCG blog. Here are links:

http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/05/15/gce-report-sunday-afternoon/

http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/additional-council-nomination-results/

http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/monday-general-conference-of-elders-report/

It will be interesting to see the direction UCG goes from this point on.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Poll Results

2011-05-10T16:36:00.000-05:00

Here are the poll results for my two recent polls.

47 people responded to my poll question, "What stands out in your mind as the most important cause of the split between UCG and ministers leaving UCG?"

Changing or watering down doctrine and obedience to God's commandments - 8 (17 %)

Personal ego, vanity, and carnality of certain leaders and ministers - 31 (65 %)

A structure of governance that uses balloting to choose the leaders of the organization - 3 (6 %)

Other (comment) - 5 (10 %)

34 people responded to my poll question, "Has the UCG congregation in your area been severely split between UCG and COGWA, or has 90% of the congregation stayed together and either stayed with UCG or left to go with COGWA as a whole congregation?"

About 90% of our congregation has stayed together and stayed in UCG - 15 (44 %)

About 90% of our congregation has stayed together and gone with COGWA - 9 (26 %)

Our congregation has split with many staying in UCG and many going with COGWA - 10 (29 %)

There have been some reports of Holy Day attendance and offering stats for UCG and COGWA. Bob Thiel reports that UCG attendance for the first and last days of unleavened bread were 8,225 and 7,553 respectively, and the offerings were $544,408.14 and $547,662.84 respectively for UCG. COGWA has reported a first day offering of approximately $370,000.
See links below:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-says-now-is-not-the-time/

http://cogwa.org/members/entry/april-29-2011-member-letter

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Should COGWA Members Proselytize UCG Members?

2011-04-26T14:38:00.000-05:00

"Proselytize." In preparing this post, I had to look that word up in a dictionary to know how to spell it. Here is a definition I found: "to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause." I like the word "recruit" better - it is easier to spell, pronounce, and understand.

Apparently that is becoming an issue with Church members who attend COGWA visiting UCG services and trying to recruit UCG members into coming to COGWA services.

Should this be done?

The true Church of God is a spiritual body, not an organization. It is the collective body of all those people who have the gift of God's Holy Spirit dwelling in them. "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body--whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free--and have all been made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Corinthians 12:13). "But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His" (Romans 8:9). This is what Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong taught and it is what the Bible teaches.

So you can have converted members of the true Church of God attending services sponsored by different organizations.

I assume there are many converted Church members in both UCG and COGWA. I have no reason to think otherwise.

It is unfortunate that organizations in the true Church view each other competitively, but that is often the case. Probably, this is a characteristic of the era we are in. If we are in the Laodicean era, and I think we are, Christ does not praise the whole Church of God for the spiritual state we are in.

Two Church of God organizations that are hostile to each other may both be wrong, or one may be right and the other wrong, but they can't both be right. There is some fault somewhere.

Does it matter between UCG and COGWA which fellowship a member attends with? Is it important?

It might very well matter and be important.

As I point out in my book, Preaching the Gospel, members have a right, and a duty, to judge matters they need to judge in order to make a decision they have the responsibility for making. In order to attend services and pay tithes and offerings, they have to make a decision about fellowships, where to attend and which to support, and to do that they have to judge.

And in judging a matter to know God's will before making a decision, we should get the facts and try to prove all things (1 Thessalonians 5:21, Proverbs 18:17).

It is not wrong for Church of God members to discuss these things (Proverbs 27:17, Proverbs 11:14, 15:22, 24:6). Depending on the situation, talking with other members may be part of doing research to get necessary information needed to make a decision.

But should COGWA members go to UCG services and in conversation with UCG members criticize UCG leadership, policies, and teachings?

I think not.

There must be a certain respect shown to the office of the ministry (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13). Such ministers do have a certain authority over the services they conduct and the meeting places for those services (Hebrews 13:17). As much as possible, we are to speak the same thing (1 Corinthians 1:10-13), and God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33). Brethren want to be able to meet in peace, not contention. We are commanded to avoid those who cause division, and UCG pastors have the authority to enforce this principle (Romans 16:17).

I do not think it is wrong for a member who attends COGWA to visit a UCG meeting (if the pastor allows), and to respectfully answer questions from members about COGWA, but without criticizing UCG. But there must be a balance. COGWA members should behave as guests and seek to be peaceable. Perhaps a UCG member may want to know in more detail from a COGWA member why he left UCG, but in that case such a conversation is better conducted outside of UCG services, such as over the telephone, but not in a UCG meeting place where other members who simply want to meet in peace can overhear. Members should show respect to other members by avoiding words that can offend unnecessarily, and should not openly contradict and criticize the ministers of the services they are attending (Luke 17:1-2, Matthew 18:6-7).

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

When and How to Judge, Chapter 5

Should Each Member Promote His Own Opinion?, Chapter 6

Do We Overcome Sin by Our Power or by God's Power?

2011-04-20T16:06:00.003-05:00

Do We Overcome Sin by Our Power or by God's Power?

I think the answer, based on the Bible, is both.

Our own power is not sufficient. We need God's help to overcome. But we must make the effort.

If we think it is only by our power, we deceive ourselves and think that we are self-sufficient. If we think it is only by God's power, we may wait for God to do everything for us and not go all out 100% to do our part, to make the effort. We have to strive with all our might to overcome sin, then trust God to give us the extra help we need to succeed.

God's Spirit gives us the understanding of God's law. God does this by opening our minds to understand the Bible and by helping us see how to apply Bible instruction to the circumstances of our life. Without that help from God, we would be deceived like the world and not understand God's law and its correct application. But we must make the effort. Even then, our effort may not be sufficient to break bad habits, overcome addictions, and put sin out of our lives, but we need to pray for God's help and keep trying with all our might, trusting God to give us the victory in the end.

Here is a quote from my book, Preaching the Gospel:

"I have heard some speakers say that a problem some people have in trying to overcome addictive sins is that they are not able to do it because they are trying to do it by their own power. When I hear this, I am never quite sure what the speaker means. Sometimes the speaker may say that we need to quit trying to overcome sin by our own power. But I find no verse in the Bible that says, 'Don't try to overcome sin by your own power.'

"Certainly we should ask God for help to overcome. But we must also do our part by trying as hard as we can. It is not a matter of doing it by God's power or our own. It is both. God helps us in our trials by giving us power and help in ADDITION to what we are able to do for ourselves. For example, if I am unemployed, I may pray and ask God to help me find a job, but then after praying I should do my part by diligently looking for a job.

"God wants us to make the maximum effort we can. Jesus Christ said, 'If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire' (Matthew 18:8-9). Jesus is speaking figuratively. He does not want us to physically mutilate or injure our bodies, for the Bible also says, 'Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are' (1 Corinthians 3:16-17). Our bodies belong to God, and we should protect and take care of our health. In the sermon on the mount, Jesus is speaking figuratively to illustrate how great our effort should be to overcome sin, even to the point of giving up things we may love to avoid the temptations of sin. An example of how to apply this might be a person who has a problem with over-drinking giving up alcohol altogether, because trying to drink alcohol in moderation is a temptation for that person to drink in excess.

"When Jacob wrestled with God, God refused to bless him until Jacob proved his willingness to strive with all his might to obtain the blessing, even when in pain (Genesis 32:22-31).

"An example of the balance between our effort and the additional power God gives us can be found in the life of Samson. After he lost his strength because his hair was cut and the Philistines put out his eyes, he was in the temple of the Philistines where they were assembled. 'Then Samson called to the Lord, saying, "O Lord God, remember me, I pray! Strengthen me, I pray, just this once, O God, that I may with one blow take vengeance on the Philistines for my two eyes!" And Samson took hold of the two middle pillars which supported the temple, and he braced himself against them, one on his right and the other on his left. Then Samson said, "Let me die with the Philistines!" And he pushed with all his might, and the temple fell on the lords and all the people who were in it. So the dead that he killed at his death were more than he had killed in his life' (Judges 16:28-30). Note the sequence. First Samson asked God to give him strength. Then he pushed 'with all his might'. He asked God for help, then he made maximum effort to push on the pillars.

"Did Samson do it by God's power or his own strength? I think the answer is, both. Most of the actual physical power came from God, but I don't think God would have supplied that power if Samson was not trying as hard as he could. And part of it was Samson's strength, even if it was only 1%. Samson did his part with whatever strength he had, and God supplied the additional strength that he needed to succeed.

"There may also be a lesson in this for preaching the gospel. As a Church, we need to strive with ALL our might to preach the gospel to the world, and then God can give us the extra help we need to succeed. When God sees that individual members are striving hard to sacrifice to support the preaching of the gospel and the Ezekiel warning to the public out of a motive of love, He can bless us with more power to do so. But if we are only making a half-hearted effort, I think God will help us less until our attitude improves."

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

How to Obtain More of God's Help in Breaking Bad Habits, Chapter 7

Why Did the Split Occur?

2011-04-05T01:31:00.002-05:00

Less than a year ago, a split began in United Church of God. That split is generally complete. A little more than half of the full-time paid pastors in UCG and less than half of all UCG ministers (including local elders) have left UCG and formed Church of God a Worldwide Association. Preliminary indications are that about 40% of UCG's membership (or less) have begun attending COGWA, and that may grow in time. Thus the split seems to be about right down the middle. This is not a case of a small splinter group leaving UCG.

Why did this split occur?

At one time we were together in one fellowship. Most of us in the Churches of God, especially older members, were together in Worldwide Church of God when Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was alive. Then we were split and divided into many Church of God groups after Mr. Armstrong died.

It is easy to look back and understand the immediate cause of that first split. Worldwide was split over doctrine. Those who were leading Worldwide in the decade after Mr. Armstrong's death, Joseph Tkach Sr., Joseph Tkach Jr., Michael Feazell, Greg Albrecht, and others, led that organization and those who were willing to follow them into traditional Protestant doctrines. Those who wanted to retain the older teachings of Worldwide, for whatever the reason (personal tradition and habit, family and friends connections, loyalty to Mr. Armstrong, or faith in God's word, the Bible), left and formed or joined many Church of God fellowships, including many of the main organizations that exist today.

Doctrine was the obvious direct cause of the splitting and scattering of ministers and members in Worldwide from 1987 through 1995.

But what was the cause of the split of UCG in 2010-2011? Is the reason so obvious?

If you had to sum it up to an interested outsider in just one or a few sentences, what would you say?

If your co-worker at the office in the cubicle next to you overheard a phone conversation you had with a Church member, or if a neighbor overheard you talking with your wife in the backyard about the split, or someone not knowledgeable about what happened asked you, "Did your church split?", and "Why did they split?", how would you explain it?

During the time the split was developing, I had assumed that there must be some hidden agenda of one side or another or a cause that was driving the split, something that was known to the ministry but carefully hidden from the membership and outsiders. I thought that before the split was complete the hidden agenda or cause would become clearly known. Well, if there is something like that, it has not become clearly known, not to me, except vaguely, like one can see part way through a fog. There may be hints and clues here and there that need to be interpreted, but nothing as clear and obvious as the cause of the break-up of Worldwide 1987-1995.

There can certainly be more than one cause or force driving the UCG split.

It is important to try to understand because we should learn the lessons God wants us to learn from what we go through in this life. We should learn not to repeat mistakes. We should ask ourselves why this happened and seek wisdom about this. This is also appropriate as we approach the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread. This is a season for self-examination and repentance. We should seek to understand why this occurred because if mistakes were made, we need to learn from them, to repent as needed, and to avoid those mistakes in the future.

What do you think were the primary causes of the split?

Opinions among bloggers, writers, and ministers who have written and spoken about this vary.

Bob Thiel (COGwriter) in the Church of God News blog has said that he felt that vanity, ego, and personality conflict have been strong forces driving this split.

James Malm in Shining Light blog has taught that one of the driving forces has been doctrine. He believes that the leaders of UCG want to liberalize and water-down doctrine and/or obedience to God's commandments, and that those ministers leaving UCG to go to COGWA want to set up a hierarchical governance system based on the WCG/LCG model, and that the seeds of this split were in UCG from the beginning of its formation. This seems to coincide with the view of Dixon Cartwright of the Journal who seems to feel that one side (UCG) wants to move away from the influence of Mr. Armstrong and the other side (COGWA) wants to retain the influence of Mr. Armstrong.

Joel Meeker in his letter in the UCG Current Crisis site may represent the view of many ministers leaving UCG. He states that the present UCG leadership has not only shown a pattern of repeated violations of the rules of UCG that the entire ministry had agreed to follow when UCG was set up, but that they have also repeatedly violated God's law in their actions, and that these violations have destroyed the trust that is necessary for effective cooperation as well as the legitimacy of the authority of UCG's leaders, to the point that the ministers leaving UCG cannot support those violations of the law of God and UCG rules. He feels that is it spiritually dangerous to continue to follow leaders who show a pattern of lawlessness in their administration. This may explain why some ministers felt they had to leave, but it does not explain WHY the split occurred. If it is true that UCG leaders violated laws, WHY did they violate laws? If they mistreated certain ministers, WHY did they mistreat those ministers? They did not mistreat their own allies in this controversy. It was all part of HOW the split occurred, but is not an explanation for WHY the split occurred.

Those may indeed be contributing reasons, but I have long maintained that a primary driving force for division is the form or structure of governance that UCG adopted since its formation. That form of governance, governance by the authority of the ballot-box, is a recipe for division and strife. It magnifies small differences of opinion that could otherwise be reconciled or lived with peacefully. It tends to encourage politics and the taking of sides in a controversy. It can take a small cause and magnify it till it splits an organization.

The voting process creates an arena for ministers to battle it out with the ballot box, to fight for their ideas, to try to help their side win, which is directly contrary to the spirit of Proverbs 17:13. Ministers feel a responsibility to vote wisely and to offer wise and helpful counsel to others who vote and who want to practice the principle of seeking a multitude of counsel before making an important decision (Proverbs 11:14). They feel a responsibility to seek wise counsel in how to vote and to "get all the facts". The voting process also sets up a state of mind that tells the ministry that the leaders are responsible to them. So some advise the voting for or against this or that, and that magnifies and intensifies differences and tends to line people up in opposite camps.

But the worst and most insidious effect of ballot-box governance is that it can motivate those who have been elected to leadership positions to get rid of potential opposition voters before the next election so they can stay in office.

Imagine if President Obama had the authority to drive out citizens of the United States who disagree with him or to remove their voting rights before the next election. Would he use that power? Would any president?

I think that at some point many or most of the members of the Council of Elders wanted those who disagreed with them, who are the ones with the authority to vote them out of office, to just leave. In other words, if you don't agree with us, leave. Leave peacefully if possible, but leave. Don't stay in UCG and vote against us and vote us out of power. Just get out. We will help you to leave and give you a push.

That is a direct effect of ballot-box governance, because the voting process creates the fear that those who disagree will vote against those in office. Those in office do not want that. They do not want to be voted out or voted against.

Desire for power may be a motive here, but not even that necessarily. The motive can be a sincere motive to protect what are thought to be right policies and decisions. UCG council members may want to stay in office because they believe their leadership, policies, and decisions are right and good for UCG. Only God can read minds and know if the leadership wants to stay in power for their own personal desire for power and money or because they think it is best for the Church.

But either way, making leaders subject to being voted out of office by those under their authority can be a motive for those leaders to use their authority to push opposition voters out of the organization. And I think this has been a big contributing cause for the split. Without ballot-box governance, there would still be differences of opinion, but they could better be managed and reconciled without a full-blown split.

Look at the history of how this split started.

It started with an accusation of wrong-doing against Leon Walker for giving information and advise about voting. That in turn led to his being fired by the Council, and that led to the removal of many Latin American ministers who supported him.

It all started with an email about voting.

There was also an issue about the Sabbath doctrine. That issue was magnified with a document published by UCG leadership that "stirred the pot" and created concern on the part of many ministers and members because it implied that it was ok under certain circumstances for a Church member to employ people to work on part of a sabbath day. That paper became a divisive influence, and I think UCG leaders knew that it would be. Members went to their pastors about it and pastors often had to take a stand one way or another. UCG leadership later clarified their position on that issue, stating that it is NOT ok to employ someone to work on a sabbath day, but they only issued that clarification AFTER the split had passed the point of no return. It certainly gives the appearance that UCG leaders intended that paper to create division so they could separate out those ministers who were not deeply committed to supporting the UCG leadership no matter what. If that was their purpose, they succeeded.

So here is a recipe for division.

Start with differences of opinion on a variety of issues. These could include how much money to allocate to preaching the gospel, relocating headquarters, cooperation with another Church of God fellowship, interpretation of the law of the Sabbath, details of governance, etc. People might line up in a variety of ways in these issues where some who are on the same side on one issue would be on different sides on another issue. It would be a real mix, not necessarily two well-defined sides. This creates an environment for growth of division, but not yet - other things are needed. It is like a bread mix with flour, water, sugar, salt, but without the yeast.

So add personal ego and animosities. These are like seeds that can grow, or like yeast in bread.

But yeast doesn't grow very fast in a cool environment. So add a structure of governance with elections every year to turn up the heat. Then the personal animosities can grow, feeding on differences of opinion. The structure of governance then accelerates the division. Small things become big. Towards the end, the division can be deliberately maximized by those in power in order to sway future voting results in their favor.

Look at how small this started. Leon Walker shared some facts and views in an email with some Latin American ministers about how they might vote in an upcoming election. Then he did not cancel a trip to meet at headquarters when he had already met with headquarters' representatives and was willing to meet again after his trip. So for the sake of a delay in meeting with Mr. Walker of perhaps a few weeks, UCG leaders split the whole Church of God organization right down the middle.

I don't think small things like this would be so magnified without a process of balloting.

I am sure there is not just one cause for this division and split. Nor is there just one leader on either side. Many people are involved on both sides. Even one person can have many reasons for taking one course of action or another, and the reasons and causes for what happened multiply with many individuals making decisions for many reasons.

Since most ministers in COGWA elected to resign from UCG, they face the responsibility of explaining to their members why they had to resign, and collectively, those individual explanations may help paint a picture of a cause of the split, at least from the point of view of those ministers.

Doctrine is probably part of it. Even if the purpose of the sabbath paper was not to change doctrine at this time but to put pressure on some ministers to leave UCG, that tactic would not work if there was not a difference in doctrinal views between the two camps. And probably personal ego, vanity, and selfishness played some part. We all have human nature.

There was a difference of opinion regarding a move of headquarters to Texas, and there may be a difference of opinion regarding the relationship with Living Church of God. Prior to the proposal to move to the Dallas area, Clyde Kilough and Jim Franks, UCG leaders who held office at that time, had visited Living Church of God headquarters and met with Roderick Meredith, Richard Ames, and other LCG leaders in late 2006. Mr. Kilough and Mr. Franks are now with COGWA.

But I believe a large, contributing cause of the split was democracy in action, democracy of such a form and structure that it enabled small differences of opinion to be magnified and to become a catalyst for a struggle for power that split the organization right down the middle.

There is an irony in that the justification for using balloting to govern the Church is that it is an implementation of the scripture that says, "Where there is no counsel, the people fall; But in the multitude of counselors there is safety" (Proverbs 11:14). Did government by voting provide "safety" in this case? Did UCG leadership behave as if they were receiving and following a multitude of wise counsel?

It appears that the whole system of UCG's governance has failed. This split is the proof. Splits usually occur because of an important issue. This split apparently occurred because of NO clear, outstanding issue. That is the big news.

There is no outstanding issue, as there was in Worldwide in 1995, which can be clearly identified as the cause of the split. The Sabbath paper was a minor issue. The doctrine has not been changed. Whether the UCG leadership intends to change the Sabbath doctrine in the future, the fact is they have not changed it so far. The move to Dallas is minor. Who cares where headquarters is located? The mistreatment of some ministers is not the issue. The division was the CAUSE of the mistreatment, not the other way around.

Members could understand in 1995. I do not think they understand today. To the membership, it must look like their ministers simply could not get along with each other. The members seem to set a better example of Christian tolerance and fellowship than some of the ministers. Yet the members must suffer because of the division. And if there is no clear cause, how can COGWA start in an atmosphere of enthusiasm for the future?

In 1998 Global Church of God was split because of disagreement between Mr. Roderick Meredith and board members Larry Salyer and Raymond McNair. Mr. Salyer and Mr. McNair gained control of the corporation and its assets and copyrights. But 75-80% of the ministry and membership stayed with Mr. Meredith and they formed Living Church of God. I remember that at the time I thought that Mr. Salyer and Mr. McNair were simply unable to give any good reason for separating from Mr. Meredith. And it may have been the lack of a clear and understandable reason for the separation that contributed to the lack of credibility of Mr. Salyer and Mr. McNair with about 80% of the membership.

UCG was formed in 1995 by ministers coming out of Worldwide Church of God over doctrinal differences. At that time, they chose the name "United Church of God" and they chose a form of governance based on the authority of decisions made by balloting, a structure of governance they hoped would prevent a repeat of the split that had occurred in Worldwide. But that form of governance did not prevent a split, and the church governed by that structure has not lived up to its name. It has undergone two major splits, one with David Hulme in 1998 and now a greater split with the ministers who have formed COGWA. I think the evidence shows that the ballot-box structure of governance chosen for UCG has been a major contributing cause of the latest split.

I have added a few blogs to my Church of God Blogs site (see sidebar for link at left). John Carmack's "Church of God Perspective" blog is back up and running. It was down for a while as he switched from Blogger to Wordpress.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

X-UCG Ministers Are Staying Together

2011-03-18T16:18:00.007-05:00

UCG Split Mostly Complete

The split that began last June with the firing of Leon Walker is mostly complete. About 1/3 of the total ministry, but more than half of the professional ministry, has left United Church of God (UCG) to form and join with Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA).

I have brought the alphabetical list of ministers up to date in my post Where UCG Ministers Stand with latest information about resignations from UCG and affiliation with COGWA based on contact names in the COGWA congregation page. Names added or updated include Bill Swanson, Reuel Dima, Eschun Plange, Ofori Amanfo, Benjamin Agyopong, Adonijah Blay, Joseph Baah, Floyd Satterwhite, Heamasi K.Ta'ufo'ou, Eddie Johnson, Peter Hawkins, Howard Wills, Paul Cebrian, Kambani Banda, Jerry Shachoongo, Richard Rand, Walter Hawk, Frank McCrady Sr., Roy Dove. Morgen Kriedemann, Tony Levy, Neil Becker, Neville Smith, Behrman Doucet, Jim Chapman, Eriz Dizon, Norman Julag-ay, Florante Siopan, David Witt, Charles May, James Capo, and Gary Black.

Here is a link to the COGWA listing of congregations and people to contact:
http://cogwa.org/congregations

There have been a few new letters from former UCG ministers in the "Resignation Letters" section of UCG Current Crisis site. One that I want to mention is the letter from Joel Meeker. It is worth a read if you want to understand the position of many ministers leaving UCG. Whether you agree with it or not, I think it expresses the view of many leaving UCG more clearly than many other documents. It also helps to show the view on UCG governance that many UCG and X-UCG ministers have had. Link:
http://www.freewebs.com/ucgcurrentcrisis/resignationletters.htm

With the split mostly complete, I want to say that it is to the credit of the UCG and COGWA ministry that no one has violated 1 Corinthians 6:1-7 by filing any lawsuits over alleged libel or violations of law concerning alleged violations of the constitution or bylaws of the United Church of God corporation.

X-UCG Ministers Are Staying Together

X-UCG ministers are staying together in one large fellowship, not fragmenting into many small independent groups and congregations. Larry Salyer, Jack Hendren, and Graemme Marshall were for a time not listed in the COGWA website, but later they were added. I have not found Leon Walker listed as part of any leadership team in COGWA or as a person to contact in the list of congregations page in the COGWA website, but I am sure he is affiliated with COGWA as a regional director of some kind over the Latin American region.

Most of the resignations and firings from UCG that will happen have happened, yet I know of no X-UCG ministers who have set up their own small independent group. Maybe a few have, but I do not know about it yet. It appears that all of those leaving UCG are going to COGWA.

Also, I know of no case where a minister leaving UCG has gone with Living Church of God (LCG) or with any other organized fellowship that existed before the UCG split started. Some members may be doing that, however.

X-UCG Ministers Give COGWA a Vote of Confidence

Although the split is largely complete, and most of those who are leaving UCG have already done so, a trickle of ministers have continued to leave UCG and go with COGWA until the present time, even many weeks after COGWA was formed by the main body of ministers that was with COGWA from the beginning. The fact that ministers have been resigning from UCG and going to COGWA continuously since COGWA formed, though at a slowing rate, indicates a vote of confidence in the way it is forming. There are ministers who did not step out and cut their ties with UCG through the time COGWA formed, but did afterwards. It is as if they were waiting to see how things shaped up before burning their bridges. But then, after COGWA got a good start and they could see how it was coming together, they elected to make their move. This indicates they like what they see at COGWA and believe it will succeed, and this suggests that COGWA will be strong and viable.

This may be an early sign that those in a position to know feel that COGWA will grow stronger in time and UCG will grow weaker. It reminds me of the situation in the split between the house of David and the house of Saul in ancient Israel (2 Samuel 3:1). COGWA now has the most experienced and most able ministers, more than half the paid ministry from UCG, and over time more UCG members will gravitate to a more professional ministry, especially since they can listen to sermons from the COGWA website and compare the speakers in COGWA with their own local UCG pastor, who may be an unpaid elder working part time. Those ministers who have held back, waiting to see how things developed before burning their bridges with UCG, are not holding back anymore. They have seen COGWA and they like what they see. COGWA is now a serious group, and it will be a magnet for UCG members. The fact that the majority of paid pastors in UCG have gone with COGWA is an early indication that indeed COGWA expects, based on early trends, to receive enough tithe income to pay the salaries of those full-time ministers who wish to go with them. It is a visible indicator of what is not directly visible: the early habits and trends of brethren in attending and contributing to COGWA.

Is Split Mostly at the Pastor Level, Not Member Level?

It seems the decisions being made about going to COGWA or staying with UCG are mostly being made at the pastor level, not at the membership level. A pastor decides where he will go. Probably, most members (but not all) follow their pastor. So the shape of the split is being decided primarily by individual pastors. And this means that not all members of every area have had a good choice between two fellowships if they want to attend with most of the members in their local area. Some cities are areas now served primarily by a UCG pastor, some primarily by a COGWA pastor, but not both, until both UCG and COGWA can fill the gaps.

So if you are a UCG member living in a city where the pastor has stayed with UCG, there may not be much of a COGWA congregation in your city you can attend with. Or, if you are a UCG member living in a city whose pastor has gone with COGWA, the majority of the congregation may have stayed with their pastor, and there may not be much of a UCG congregation you can attend with. But in some cities, there may be both a sizable UCG congregation and a sizable COGWA congregation, and in that case you have more of a choice.

But both churches are working to fill the gaps, to provide ministerial care to every area. This means the existing ministerial manpower is stretched. Their workload has increased and they will be doing much more traveling. And the level of care of the members may suffer as a result. Members who have seen their pastor every Sabbath might now see him every other Sabbath because on alternate Sabbaths he has to drive to speak to an area whose original pastor is now with the other group.

Question: Are congregations themselves being divided and split, or are congregations remaining intact and staying with UCG or going to COGWA as a whole congregation? Are there cases where local congregations are split down the middle with half staying with UCG and half going with COGWA?

In the long term however, each family and member will make a decision where to go. As UCG and COGWA provide ministers for every area, members will have more choices, and some members may elect to attend with LCG or some other existing group. UCG members will learn more details about COGWA from connections with family members and friends who attend there and they will sample sermons and literature as it becomes available on the COGWA website.

Something that can become an issue will be members visiting the other group's local congregation. For example, a member of a UCG congregation might visit a local COGWA congregation, then come back to services with UCG and tell all his friends what a wonderful sermon he heard in COGWA. How will the UCG pastor react to that? Will such visiting be discouraged? Will it be forbidden?

Prospects for COGWA Long Term Growth

It remains to be seen how much and how fast COGWA will grow over the months and years ahead. It is possible they may attract more and more members. They will need to attract more members to be able to pay adequate salaries to all the full-time ministers who want to be with COGWA and still do an effective work of preaching the gospel to the public, which they want to do.

I already mentioned that UCG members may be attracted to COGWA by the level of care and instruction they can get from the professional and experienced ministry there. COGWA has a larger body of experienced and able ministers, and many UCG members will want to be served by them.

COGWA may have the higher moral and ethical ground in matters relating to the split, and as the dust settles, more and more UCG members will realize this.

I think the present UCG leadership bears the greater responsibility here for splitting the UCG organization. They drove the X-UCG ministers out. It was UCG's initiative, not that of the ministers who are leaving UCG. This split started when Leon Walker was fired. I think the idea that UCG leaders fired Leon Walker for disobeying orders to report to headquarters is a smoke screen, not the real reason. They could have disciplined him another way, and they could have tried to work things out with him. UCG leaders like to say that even in a business corporation you will be fired for not obeying orders. Most of these men have never worked in business corporations, but businesses generally treat their key executives better than they treated Leon Walker. A business does not give up a valuable employee that easily. Mr. Walker was not fired for refusing to meet with UCG leaders. He had already met with their representatives and was apparently willing to meet with them again. He simply refused to cancel a trip to serve the churches under his care, a trip which he regarded as important.

UCG leaders also erred in publishing a document on the Sabbath that appeared to teach the idea that it is ok for a church member to own and operate a business that employs people to work on a sabbath day. That document became a source of division, and UCG leaders did not clarify the issue until after the split had been largely accomplished. They have behaved in many respects as if they wanted this split to occur.

COGWA is going through tough times financially right now. They have more than half the paid ministers but probably not more than half the tithe-paying membership of UCG before the split. But I think there may be a steady flow of members from UCG to COGWA. As this occurs over the next year or two, COGWA attendance and income will grow and UCG will shrink. It remains to be seen if this happens quickly enough and to the necessary degree to enable COGWA to keep all the full-time ministry leaving UCG and also preach the gospel. But they say they are able to do it.

COGWA is trying to include as many X-UCG ministers as possible, but by doing so it is including in their ranks ministers of divergent views and varying degrees of faithfulness to God. Right now, COGWA has unity because all these ministers have been united in their differences with the UCG leadership. They are in a honeymoon period, but opposition to UCG leadership policies will not keep them united forever. As they become more settled, they have to strive to keep the spirit of cooperation they have and they have to start off with a right form of governance, or they too will experience internal division to one degree or another. There will always be differences of opinion, but a structure of governance that encourages politics and magnifies divisions can create the same kind of problems in COGWA as it did in UCG.

COGWA Governance

The permanent structure of governance for COGWA has not yet been determined. The leadership team of COGWA is considered temporary until permanent governance is established.

COGWA has several options. They can organize just like UCG, with yearly or frequent re-occurring elections. They can organize like UCG, but with a council elected for life, elections by the ministry just for replacements of those who die or resign. They can choose ALL positions for life, including chairman and president. They can have elections, not by ministry, but by Council members to approve replacements to their Council. Or they can have elections for limited terms, but not so often, perhaps elections every 4 years or 7 years, or something like that, to reduce the politicking that goes on.

Probably, they will not choose a structure of governance with rules exactly like UCG, unless they want the same result (I am sure they do not).

One option I had thought was a possibility before was that one or several ministers leaving UCG might elect to form small, independent churches consisting of one or a small number of local and regional congregations. Those autonomous groups could then cooperate to serve common needs such as songbooks, Feast sites, etc. So far, that has not happened.

There is an apparent effort on the part of COGWA leaders to include as many as possible of all the ministers leaving UCG. They want one large, centralized organization, not a loose association of small groups. They have published letters in their website giving instructions for how funds should be handled by local congregations. You can read these for yourself, but what I get out of it is that they are discouraging any local incorporation. A local bank account is ok, but not autonomous organization.
Link:
http://cogwa.org/members/entry/january-20-2011-member-letter

As far as I know, the issue of allowing local, independent, incorporated churches to be in COGWA in an association status vs. one large, centrally controlled organization was never put up for a vote in the January conference in Louisville, Kentucky. They voted on the name of the Church and they voted to approve the temporary leadership teams, but not on the possibility of member congregations having some independence from the main organization.

UCG, COGWA Estimated Attendance and Finances, and Other UCG/X-UCG News

Various estimates and claims about finances, number of members attending, and number of ministers in UCG and COGWA have been made in various blogs, and the numbers have been changing, which is expected. Things will somewhat stabilize by the summer I think. In this section I will give links to various posts in blogs that discuss this, and I will add my estimate for the decrease in UCG income.

If COGWA finances do not rise to meet the needs of the paid ministry leaving UCG, some of those ministers will have to organize independently or go with another group such as LCG if they are able. For most ministers who have worked full time in the ministry, getting a regular job in the world to support themselves and their families is not a satisfactory option. It is not that they have no marketable skills in the workplace. They have been called to the ministry by God and they are obligated to serve God in the office they have been called to.

When a paid minister in UCG loses his salary, he almost has to organize independently or find an existing Church of God to employ him. His duty to Christ requires he carry out his ministry full time, because that is what he has been called to do, but he cannot do that if he has to support himself with a job outside the ministry (1 Corinthians 9:14).

Some few ministers may yet organize independently or join some other existing organization rather than stay with UCG or go to COGWA as the months go by. But so far, no.

The links to news items below are for the last several weeks.

First, how much has UCG income dropped since the split?

Bob Thiel (COGwriter) in Church of God News blog reported that UCG treasurer Aaron Dean estimates that United Church of God income for the year from July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 will be $18,500,000, down from an income of $23,870,107 for the previous one year period. That is a decrease of 22.5%.
Link:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucgs-aaron-dean-reports-finances-ac-reports-another-ministerial-loss/

But UCG income currently must be down much more than that. The decrease of 22.5% is for a whole year, the early part of which was before the main split. There was a period when a reconciliation was hoped for by many brethren, and this period of hope lasted through the Feast. From July 1 through October 31, a period of four months, income may have only been down slightly from the year before. Most ministers who have gone with COGWA were still in UCG at that time. After the Feast, the division and splitting continued, finally resulting in the formation of Church of God, a Worldwide Association in January this year.

There is no way to know exactly how much lower the income is currently in the month of March or for February compared with the same month a year ago. Mr. Dean would have that information, but he is not announcing it. But for what it is worth, here is my ballpark rough estimate.

To keep it simple, I will assume no seasonal variation in income from month-to-month during the comparison period of July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010. I will assume an income from July 1, 2010 thru October 31, 2010 (4 months) about equal to the same period the previous year. It might have gone down a little, but this was before it became evident that UCG would definitely split, and most UCG members were probably paying their tithes to UCG. I will assume a gradual decrease from November 1 through January 31 (3 months) as many members realized they may leave UCG. Finally, I assume that most members who have stopped tithing to UCG did so by around the end of January after COGWA had formed. This would indicate a leveling off of income and a steady though reduced income from February 1, 2011 through June 30, 2011, 5 months.

Based on the above assumptions, the figure for the percentage reduction in income now and for the 5 months February 1 through June 30 that would give the 22.5 % decrease for the whole year is 41.5%, as I have calculated with a spreadsheet using my stated assumptions. So I am estimating that current UCG income is down 41.5% from last year for February, March, and the coming months through June 2011. And since this is just a rough estimate, I will round out the decrease in income to "about 40 percent", or in other words, I am estimating that UCG is only receiving about 60% of the income it was receiving this time last year.

Bob Thiel reports that COGWA gives the number of their ministers at 170, their membership at 8,000, and the number of congregations at 232. If COGWA has gained those 8,000 members from UCG, then UCG has lost roughly 40% of their members or more, which fits with my income estimate above.
Link to post with 170 ministers and 8,000 membership figures:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/cogwas-clyde-kilough-and-fragmentation/
Link to post with figure of 232 congregations, also estimates of the rankings in size of various Churches of God:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/pcgcpgwa-third-largest-cog/
Another link to a post about the 232 congregations figure:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/cogwa-now-lists-232-congregations/

COGwriter reports UCG lost 173 ministers, link:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-loses-6-pastors-in-ghana-now-a-total-loss-of-173-ministers-and-elders/

COGwriter report that UCG lost 53% of its PAID ministry, more than half, links:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/tongas-heamasi-k-taufoou-makes-166-ucg-ministerial-losses-whats-the-message/

http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucgs-good-news-and-beyond-today-dropping/

COGwriter reports about United Church News published information about UCG new hires and that UCG has lost 1/3 of its total paid and unpaid ministers (pastors and local elders). So UCG has lost a disproportionate number of full-time pastors compared to all ministers including local elders. It has retained about 2/3 of all ministers, but less than half of full-time paid pastors and ministers. Link:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/united-news-out/

A COGWA member letter says that COGWA has hired 59 people, most ministers:
http://cogwa.org/members/entry/february-11-2011-member-letter

An update from Victor Kubik gives some information about UCG loses, number of ministers, new hires, etc. Link:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/update-from-victor-kubik/

Shining Light blog has posted about some new pastor assignments in UCG, link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=2313

COGwriter blog mentions the problem of gaps in coverage of congregations by COGWA ministers. I expect that these gaps will gradually be filled to a degree, but not completely. Link:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/cogwa-acts-like-it-is-a-continuance-ucg-congregational-gaps/

UCG Current Crisis blog has published financial information about International Ambassador Outreach (IAO). Link:
http://www.freewebs.com/ucgcurrentcrisis/apps/blog/show/6285741-press-release-iao-financial-reporting-as-of-12-31-10

Here are links to posts about the COGWA conference including voting for the name of the Church, the temporary governance team, and particular leadership positions and assignments. COGWA site links:
http://cogwa.org/members/entry/january-14-2011-member-letter

http://cogwa.org/blog/entry/behind-the-scenes-at-the-louisville-conference

Here is a COGWA member letter from Clyde Kilough reporting that they have funds sufficient for their needs and they are dedicating the first holy day offering entirely to preaching the gospel to the public. I think dedicating the first holy day offering to the preaching of the gospel is an excellent idea. Members can know that their sacrifice will go directly to helping others by getting a warning message and the gospel out to those who need to hear it, and the leadership can gauge the zeal of the membership for the gospel by the size of the offering compared to the offerings for other holy days. Link:
http://cogwa.org/members/entry/march-15-2011-member-letter

COGWA has a statement of beliefs in its website now. Link:
http://cogwa.org/about/fundamental-beliefs

COGWA has published a member letter giving instructions for local handling of funds. My interpretation of this is that COGWA wants to discourage independent organization and incorporation of local X-UCG congregations. They want a measure of centralized control. Link:
http://cogwa.org/members/entry/january-20-2011-member-letter

UCG has provided links to videos of its recent conference and Council of Elders meetings. Link to announcement of videos from the ministerial conference:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/02/02/video-available-ministerial-conference/
Link to videos page:
http://coe.ucg.org/videos
Link to post announcing videos from Council of Elders meetings:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/video-reports-from-council-of-elders-meetings/

The Shining Light blog has quoted a letter from Mr. Melvin Rhodes. In it, Mr. Rhodes states that Christ is the head of United Church of God. While I agree that Christ is the head of the Church, that is, the collective body of all those who have God's Holy Spirit (Ephesians 5:23, Romans 8:9), in my opinion, Christ is not the head of United Church of God as an organization. I think UCG rejected Christ as their head when they chose to place themselves under the authority of the voting of men rather than under the authority of Jesus Christ. And it seems to me that their commitment to the form of governance they agreed to in 1995 is greater than their commitment to Christ. Council members are required to make a commitment to support the decisions of the Council and this can bring them into conflict with the commitment they made at baptism to God the Father and to Christ, and this is probably why some Council members had to resign to keep a clear conscience with God. Evidence of the strength of UCG's commitment to their form of ballot-box governance is their refusal to even consider changing it in the light of more information and experience. Their decision in 1995 is set in stone for them, like the Ten Commandments. Link to Shining Light post that quotes Mr. Rhodes letter:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=2217

I found a good post in the COGwriter blog in which Bob Thiel states that the legacy of Herbert W. Armstrong is willingness to believe the Bible. I agree. Link:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/church-history/herbert-w-armstrong-died-25-years-ago/

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Earthquake Strikes Japan, Could the West Coast of the United States Be Next?

2011-03-14T21:13:00.004-05:00

A 9.0 earthquake struck Japan, killing thousands with the quake and a tsunami. The earthquake centered about 80 miles offshore of Japan, not far from Tokyo. There has been at least two explosions at nuclear power reactors, and with at least one reactor there is danger of a meltdown. At at least one facility, the level of radiation in the surrounding area was at least 1000 times the normal level, requiring the evacuation of more than 300,000 people. 1,000 bodies of those killed in the tsunami have washed ashore, and the death toll is expected to exceed 10,000. This is the fifth largest earthquake ever recorded.

Japan is an important ally of the United States in that region and has the third largest economy in the world. This quake comes just about three weeks after a devastating 6.3 earthquake hit Christchurch, New Zealand. Both quakes were part of the system known as the Pacific Ring of Fire, and they involve the same or bordering plates. One expert has said that large quakes change the stress characteristics of the earth's plates and therefore a large earthquake in one place can trigger other quakes somewhere else.

The west coast of the United States is thus at greater risk now, since it is part of the same ring of fire system and it also is vulnerable to earthquakes and tsunamis. The same system that caused the earthquakes that struck Japan and Christchurch, New Zealand can also strike California, Oregon, and Washington. The west coast of the United States is ripe for a strong earthquake, and the recent earthquakes that have occurred in the "ring of fire" region may have increased the stress in the area of our west coast states, making a major earthquake there more likely.

At the same time, the west coast, called the "left coast" by some critics of its liberal policies, has in some ways been on the cutting edge of liberalism and the promotion of wrong values, especially California. It is possible that God may decide to give this country a wake-up call by allowing serious damage or devastation by earthquakes to that area of the United States.

Pasadena, California has been the headquarters of the Worldwide Church of God and Ambassador College during most of Herbert W. Armstrong's ministry, and as a result there are many Church of God members of various fellowships living in southern California, and unless such a quake struck during the Feast of Tabernacles when most members would be away from their homes, they would need God's protection in the case of a large earthquake, and God is certainly able to protect them. For Church of God members, our trust must be in God. A number of Churches of God have been or are currently headquartered in California. Global Church of God / Living Church of God (Roderick C. Meredith) had its headquarters for many years in San Diego, California before moving to Charlotte, North Carolina. Church of God, an International Community (David Hulme) has its headquarters in Pasadena. Church of God Southern California is also headquartered in Pasadena. Church of God-eim (Steven LeBlanc) is headquartered in Modesto, California. These are just examples, there may be many others.

California is in trouble financially because of its high level of government spending and budget deficits. The economic loss produced by an earthquake of the kind that struck Japan could push that state over the edge into bankruptcy.

A disaster coming to California, Oregon, or Washington could spell a disaster to the economy of the United States in more ways than one, especially if California is hit hard. As one of the largest and most important states in the United States, damage to the California economy would also damage the American economy. But also, that state is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy because of its overspending. A natural disaster would push it over the edge. Now, normally, there would be great resistance on the part of much of America to bailing California out of its budget mess, and rightly so, since Californians made that mess out of their irresponsible actions and since the United States cannot afford to bail out states. I am sure President Obama and the liberals would like to bail them out, but they would arouse the wrath of much of the rest of the country if they tried. But President Obama and the liberals would have the excuse to bail out California if it faced bankruptcy because of an earthquake. They could play upon the sympathies aroused by pictures and accounts of the suffering and devastation. It wouldn't matter if the financial crisis would be due 90% to irresponsible policies and only 10% due to the earthquake. They could pin it all on the earthquake. So besides having to deal with the direct damage to the nation's economy, paying for a bailout of the state of California could be the last straw for the national budget and national debt. That might push us over the line of no return.

Revolution in Egypt

2011-02-25T16:42:00.000-06:00

The United States has lost an ally among Arab nations surrounding Israel, and some in our country think that is a cause for celebration. Hosni Mubarak has been a force for peace in the Middle East. He has maintained peace with Israel, and now he has been removed in the name of "democracy".

The youth of Egypt, concerned about unemployment and government corruption, started the revolution. Theirs was a mostly secular movement. The strongest power in opposition to Mubarak, the well-organized Islamic Brotherhood, waited a few days to see the strength of this youth movement, and then joined it, but kept their pro-Islamic image somewhat in the background. The two movements together toppled the regime. Mubarak was forced to step down, and army leaders established a temporary government intended to eventually lead to real democracy.

The Army is in administrative control right now, but the loosely organized youth movement and the well-organized Islam Brotherhood have strong influence, and the Army leaders cannot go too far against the wishes of those groups because the military leaders cannot order their men to do what they are not willing to do, such as fire on the crowds.

Although there are various factions and forces within the Islamic Brotherhood, it is anti-Israel and similar in some ways to the rulers of Iran. They have been repressed by Mubarak for a long time. They existed since the 1920s and carried out some attacks against British forces in Egypt during World War II, and some in the party may have tried to have friendly relationships with Hitler and the Nazis.

Mubarak was holding the Muslim Brotherhood in check. When he was weakened, the Muslim Brotherhood moved in to help support the revolution. They actually had greater organization and numbers, and by adding their strength, they gave the revolution the added power to succeed. During this time, they voluntarily restrained their members from fully displaying their Islamic loyalties and agenda. The revolution was started as a secular movement by young, mostly secular activists, and the Islamic Brotherhood adopted that image in helping the activists.

Now that Mubarak is gone, the restraint on the Islamic Brotherhood is gone, and they can seek power in Egypt.

But the alliance between the young, secular activists and the Islamic Brotherhood is not a natural alliance. It is a temporary alliance of convenience. Both were in opposition to Mubarak. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." It is their common enemy, Mubarak, who united them. But with Mubarak gone, they will not stay united. They have different agendas.

Basically, the Islamic Brotherhood took advantage of the revolution started by the secular activists, and now I think they have gained dominance in that revolution. The secular activists had the energy, but the Islamic Brotherhood has the experience and organization and discipline.

Struggles for power are not won by people in their twenties. They may be fought by people in their twenties, but older men win in the end, men who were fighters themselves when they were in their twenties perhaps but now have more cunning based on experience, and more organization. Hitler became leader of what was the beginning of the Nazi party when he was about 29, but he didn't finally win top power in Germany till he was in his late forties and early fifties.

The Islamic Brotherhood is not itself united in ideology. There are different forces within it, which is typical of many movements. Those forces will battle within it and within Egypt to gain power. One such force is a movement to establish a strongly anti-Israel Islamic state like Iran. That force can find alliances with similar forces
outside Egypt. A strong man within that movement may gain control over Egypt and suppress any competing forces.

The Army itself has various forces within it, but it will be hard for them to be strong against the Islamic Brotherhood.

I find parallels between what happened with Nazism in Germany and what is happening with the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt. Hitler won power because he was determined and kept unity in his party while his opposition was divided and weak-willed. Islamic extremists in Egypt may win the same way. They will be strong-willed, united, shrewd, and ruthless. They will be peaceful when it is their advantage to be peaceful and violent when it is to their advantage to be violent. They will take advantage of every weakness of their opponents, dividing them, using them, pitting them against each other, etc.

I think they will be peaceful while they work within a process of democracy to gain power. They will gain as much power as they can thru the ballot box, and they will win a share of power in the government. But when they have gone as far as they can that way, I think they will use terror and assassination to eliminate their enemies and gain total power. They will use the secular activists till they have enough power in government to weaken the government. They will woo and ally with the army as much as they can, in the beginning. But I think they will kill off key opposition leaders and terrorize the rest when the time comes for them to take total control.

They will do well in elections because they have more organization than any other legitimate political party.

The youths who have started the revolution and opened the door for the Islamic Brotherhood have no idea who and what they are dealing with. They have enthusiasm, technical skills, and perhaps good intentions. But they are naive and they are being used. They think they are building a long-lasting, peaceful democracy. I think otherwise.

Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA)

2011-01-09T11:30:00.003-06:00

Many X-UCG ministers are meeting in Louisville, KY today through Tuesday to organize a permanent Church of God fellowship for most ministers leaving UCG. That Church has already been organized, temporarily, as Church of God, a Worldwide Association. Here is a link to their website:
http://www.cogwa.org/

The stated purpose of the conference is to approve a short-term temporary administrative and governance structure and to lay the foundation for a process that will be used to build a permanent administrative and governance structure over the next several months.

How will this new organization be governed? I have no doubt it will be governed via the ballot-box, just as UCG has been. This is Indianapolis 1995 all over again, organized and run by many of the same ministers who helped organize UCG. But the details will change. They will seek to learn from mistakes and to learn from 15 years of experience in governance by voting, experience they did not have in 1995. They will try to make changes in the details of the rules to prevent politics from dividing the Church as it has done with UCG in the last six months (or several years, depending on how you figure it). But they have not yet learned from their big mistake, using voting to select leaders at all.

The reason I think they will set up governance by ballot box is that there is no one leader who has the standing to take charge and lead without confirmation by voting. None of the main leaders of those leaving UCG, not Leon Walker, not Clyde Kilough, not Larry Salyer, not Jim Franks, not anyone you can name has the authority to govern from the top down in the eyes of the other ministers. So they will have to use voting to select a board, or a council, or a leader.

There are two ways those leaving UCG could organize. One is to organize as a loose, cooperative association of small independent groups. The association would have no authority over the pastors and small groups but would provide a forum for mutual cooperation. How would the small groups be governed if the association has no authority over them? It would be up to the pastors individually to decide how they would organize their local fellowships. Some might organize with local voting, letting themselves be elected by local elders or even by the membership. Others might govern from the top down, reporting to Christ or reporting to another pastor who reports to Christ. Over time, God could bless the one He has chosen and will make known who that is by the fruits, and others could join him. So you could start out with small groups ruled from the top down, no voting, and over time those groups could combine under the leader who is bearing the fruits of God's blessing.

The other way is to organize as a large fellowship from the beginning that will include most of the ministers leaving UCG. In that case, governance would have to be by ballot box as in UCG.

There may have been an attempt by some to organize the first way. That may be what COGA was intended to be. But now, the ministers are trying to organize one large group, not many smaller groups. Why? It may be that they quickly saw that members would not readily support small groups, but are more likely to support a large group. So this decision may be driven by the desire to have as many members as possible.

The COGA route may not have been working to attract members. UCG members are not willing, many of them, to leave a large well-established UCG to go to a small, ineffective group that is loosely associated with a collection of other small groups.

So the January 9-11 meetings are for the purpose of organizing a large, stable, strong COG that members coming out of UCG can take seriously. But to do that they will have to use ballot-box governance again. For them, organizing out of a meeting this way, there is no other option. There just isn't time to wait for fruits to show whom God has chosen to lead all the other ministers, and there is no one with the stature and prestige to lead from the beginning.

But there will be differences in details. As I speculated in my last post, one difference may be the term of office of a board member. It may be that voting decisions by the general ministry to vote a man into office as a board member will be permanent, and that board members will be elected "for life" and not have to face being removed from office in a future election. But while this may help to solve the one problem of the potential for a board to drive ministers out of the organization to avoid being voted out of office by those ministers, it will not solve the main problem with ballot-box governance.

The examples in God's word teach that He shows whom he has chosen for office in the Church of God by appointment, by fruits, or by both, but not by the voting of men. You either follow those chosen by men or those chosen by God. The leaders of UCG are those who are chosen by men. The leaders of COGWA, if they organize under ballot-box governance, will be those chosen by men.

The problem with letting men chose the leaders, by voting, is that those men who vote are not best qualified to know who should lead. They do not know the hearts of men. God must choose, not man.

The leaders of UCG who have caused this division were the very leaders chosen by the voting of men, showing that the collective ministry does NOT have the wisdom to know who to vote for.

Voting to select leaders has been likened to the principle of getting counsel and advice (Proverbs 11:14, 15:22, 24:6). But there is a difference. Counsel and advice does not carry authority. A leader can consider the advice, but it is still his decision whether to follow it or not, and sometimes the advice and counsel of the majority can be bad. Look at the examples of David, when he rejected the advice of the man who told him to slay Saul (1 Samuel 26:7-12), or when he rejected the advice of his men when they advised him not to rescue some of the people of Israel from the Philistines (1 Samuel 23:1-5). David was right to reject that advice and follow God. David had a faithfulness and a spiritual discernment that his advisors did not have, which is why God chose him (1 Samuel 16:1, Acts 13:22). Men observe what they see, and even Samuel, a righteous man of God (Jeremiah 15:1) and a prophet of God (1 Samuel 3:19-20) would have chosen someone other than David (1 Samuel 16:4-7). If Samuel was not qualified to choose the leader, how can 150 or 500 voting ministers be qualified to choose a leader? God must choose the leader, and He does not do that by the voting of men.

I have no objection to voting or polling to get opinions before a leader makes a decision. What I object to is giving the majority the power to force its will on the minority as happens when you give authority to a process of voting.

So we are likely to have two groups now, the original UCG made smaller and the new COGWA. If John Carmack's estimate is correct that 60% of the paid ministry has left UCG (see my last post), then UCG will save about half or more of the money they have been spending on minister's salaries. Add to that the savings of not supporting the poor Latin American congregations, and UCG may be able to do very well financially even on diminished tithe income. While 60% of the paid ministers are leaving, much less than 60% of the UCG members are leaving, at least in the beginning. However, more members may leave when they realize they will be pastored by less-experienced men who have been unpaid, part-time, local elders.

COGWA will have most of the paid ministers leaving UCG, but proportionally fewer members to support them. I think they can get by if they are frugal, but will not have much extra income for preaching the gospel to the world.

I think over time, COGWA will grow in membership while UCG will shrink somewhat. The experienced, full-time paid ministry in COGWA will simply be able to better serve the needs of the members, and members will see that. But COGWA will not have the income to do much of a work of preaching the gospel to the world.

Then, after the dust settles, we will see something that we have often seen in COG organizations. The leaders of each organization will boast about how much unity they have. That is, the leaders of UCG will then tell the brethren that there is wonderful unity now in United Church of God, and the leaders of COGWA will tell their members that they are now blessed with wonderful unity and peace in COGWA.

I wrote about this in my book, Preaching the Gospel. Here is a quote from the section titled "Church Government" in chapter 7:

"Is God's Church divided? Yes, it is. That is a fact. God's Church is divided into many pieces. And all the time that the division and a competitive, hostile, unloving attitude exists between the pieces, many pieces boast how much unity that particular piece has with itself! A small piece of a divided Church will say, 'What wonderful unity and harmony we had at our last ministerial conference'. That piece has 'unity', that is, until that piece divides into still smaller pieces. Then each of the smaller pieces can also boast that it has such wonderful unity within itself.

"But is there unity between the pieces? Is there unity of the whole? Not now. Not with most of the pieces. Not until different groups and organizations begin to show at least a minimum of respect and esteem for one another.

"I think we need to understand that unity within a Church of God organization is not real unity if that organization is hostile to other Church of God organizations that teach and practice the same doctrines from the Bible. Unity within one piece is not unity in the Church. Some ministers want members to identify with the 'piece' they are in, but that is wrong. Our identity is with God and with Christ and with the WHOLE body of Christ, every man or woman who has the Spirit of God. Obviously some members and ministers have fallen under the influence of serious doctrinal errors, but if a person has the Holy Spirit, that person is still a member of the Church that we should identify with, and we should help them correct their errors. Competitiveness is not going to correct anything. Some speakers like to use props. I can imagine a speaker bringing his own piece of pottery to the podium, showing the audience how beautiful and unified it is, then smashing the pottery next to the podium and holding up one of the larger pieces and saying, 'See what unity this one piece has with itself. There are absolutely no cracks or divisions in this one piece. What a perfect example to show that God's one true Church is not divided.' "

See links below for the source of this quote.

What I wrote above came true in United Church of God. They used to boast of unity, and they have put the world "united" in their name. And now they have just split. And the "unity" that will seem to exist from now on in UCG will not last. It cannot last. The same process of voting that has contributed to this split will work its magic to create disunity over time in what is left of UCG. The Council may seem unified now, but over time, maybe another 15 years, new divisions will develop, even among those who are on the same side now. It is built-in to the system.

And the same disunity will develop in COGWA if they organize under ballot-box governance.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Why Sabbath Ruling Now?

2011-01-07T15:12:00.012-06:00

United Church of God Council of Elders has issued a statement that Church members are not to operate a business, including a day-care business, on the Sabbath. This ruling came about because of a controversy over a Church family in Chile who operated a day-care center that was open certain days of the year on part of the Sabbath. This controversy became a contributing cause of the split in UCG. A link to that statement in an "Inside United: Realtime" blog post is below:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/sabbath-observance-statement-by-the-council-of-elders/

The ruling is consistent with past teachings of UCG, and in my opinion, it is the correct ruling.

But of course, it raises a question, why now? Before this ruling, UCG had published a document that implied that it was permissible for this particular family to let their business stay open on part of the Sabbath on certain days of the year. That document became a cause (not the only or principle cause) of division that has mushroomed and led to a large number of resignations and removals from the UCG ministry. Had this ruling been issued earlier, it might have helped calm things down.

Only members of the Council and administration of UCG can answer why this ruling was made at this time and not earlier. I can think of two possible reasons. One might be that the loss of ministers, members, and income has been greater than the Council desired and they want to stop the loss, and to do that they need to refute charges that they are going liberal on the Sabbath doctrine. But the other explanation is that they WANTED the division all along. That is, the original Sabbath paper that fed the division in the Church was INTENDED to sow division. By publishing that paper, which made it appear that the Church was watering down the Sabbath doctrine, they put questions in the minds of both ministers and members on this issue. This led to members questioning their ministers about that document, and ministers were forced to take a stand. Many of them were critical of that paper and gave the Council and administration the excuse to remove them on grounds of rebellion against or criticism of headquarters, or to pressure them into resigning.

Why would the Council and administration want UCG ministers to resign?

Next May 15-16 will be elections by the General Conference of Elders. The ministers who have resigned or been removed are the same ones that likely would have voted against Council members and their proposals. So the whole Sabbath controversy could simply have been engineered, or magnified, to manipulate voting results. It helped to force opposition votes out of the GCE, guaranteeing that the Council and its supporters can retain control through the next election. If so, this is a case where the mechanics of the STRUCTURE of governance, which UCG has long maintained "doesn't matter", has directly contributed to the division of the Church.

In other words, the Council could have engineered this whole division of the Church to manipulate the next ballot to their favor. They may not care if UCG is smaller as long as they can retain power.

In a December 23 letter addressed to members and ministers in UCG published in the "Inside United: Realtime" blog, Mr. Melvin Rhodes and Mr. Dennis Luker state that they think the crisis in UCG is nearing its end. This seems to be a kind of victory statement, after about 140 opposition ministers have resigned or been removed. Link below:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/23/dec-23-letter-to-ministers-and-members/

Then, in a later post from UCG, they issued their ruling on the Sabbath. Link below:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/sabbath-observance-statement-by-the-council-of-elders/

It is as if they said, ok, we have pushed the ministers out we wanted to get rid of, and now we are satisfied, so we will go back to the old Sabbath ruling and you ministers who are still with us are welcome to stay.

In fairness, even if the above interpretation is accurate, that does not mean that the Council members are doing this for selfish, personal reasons. It could be that they believe this is best for the Church in the long run. They may feel that the ministers who are leaving UCG would have been a divisive influence if they had stayed. Or they may feel that the agenda they want to advance in the Church of God is the best for the membership and that the "old guard" ministers would have been a drag on the advancement of that agenda. Each individual member of the Council and administration knows his own reasons, and God knows the hearts of all men better than they know their own selves. But whether for personal selfish reasons or for "the long-term good of the Church", the Council may have simply wanted certain ministers out of UCG, and if so, they have accomplished their purpose.

I do not know the exact number of ministers UCG had before the split. Vote totals in past elections on the issue of the move to Dallas suggest around 510-520 voting ministers, maybe more ministers in total if several choose not to vote (because they know it is wrong). About 140 ministers (including local elders as well as pastors) have resigned or been removed from the UCG ministry. Bob Thiel in his COGwriter blog reported that UCG has lost 143+ ministers and elders, using UCG Current Crisis post as a source. I counted 141 names, but I might have missed a few. Links are below:
COGwriter post:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-down-143-eldersministers/
UCG Current Crisis post:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4214920-individuals-who-have-resigned-or-been-removed-from-their-positions-in-the-last-year

In any case, 140 ministers out of about 500-520 represents more than a quarter of the entire UCG ministry and probably far more than half of all voting elders who would have voted against Council members and Council agenda items in the next election of the GCE.

But the division may be more serious than that. John Carmack in the Church of God Perspective blog has published an estimate that about 60% of the ministry has left, and I think he means the PAID ministry, the full-time pastors. This means that the loss of ministers is far greater proportionally among full-time paid pastors than among the local elders. A loss of more than half of full-time pastors represents a serious blow to the ability of UCG to care for their members. Link to John Carmack's post below:
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2011/01/les-mccullough-resigns-from-ucg.html

Besides customary accusations against those ministers who have left, much of the December 23 letter from Mr. Rhodes and Mr. Luker is an iteration of the advantages of staying in UCG and a reassurance to the members that despite the losses, UCG will be able to take care of them. But there are a few statements I want to comment on.

Mr. Rhodes and Mr. Luker state that they believe as much now as they believed 15 years ago that God led the formation of UCG in Indianapolis, and by this I think they are saying that God led the formation of UCG as an organization with ballot-box governance. I disagree. I think the fruits show that that ballot-box governance is not good, and while God through Jesus Christ allowed it He did not lead it. It was a mistake made by human beings, a mistake God allowed, and a mistake that Mr. Rhodes and Mr. Luker are still making and have not yet learned from.

Why do they think that because they made that decision that Christ led that decision? Does God allow mistakes to be made or not?

Later, they say they must be prepared to humbly learn from their mistakes, but I guess they are only referring to certain kinds of mistakes, not mistakes about governance. So far, they have not been prepared to learn from that mistake. They maintain as their founding belief and conviction that in a multitude of counselors there is safety. But there is not safety in a multitude of counselors when you get rid of counselors who disagree with you and use fear tactics to silence those who remain, which appears to have been the case. They state that their system of governance (by ballot box) gives them the tools to do God's will. Again I disagree. Their system of governance is a hindrance, not a help, to doing God's will. Ballot-box governance promotes division. It hinders the preaching of the gospel to the world because I think God will not bless a group that preaches one thing to the public (the removal of this world's democracies by the top-down government of Christ when He returns) but practices another thing (democracy) in its own organization.

Finally, they state that the General Conference of Elders (the whole ministry) remains in place to promote stability in the Church. I will let you think about that one.

In other news, Joel Meeker has written a letter to Mr. Rhodes explaining why he is declining to accept a seat on the Council of Elders. A link to UCG Current Crisis post that gives a link to Mr. Meeker's letter is below:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5674158-joel-meeker-declines-coe-position

In this letter, Mr. Meeker states that he signed a Council Code of Ethics document in 1998 in which he agrees to uphold the consensus of the Council when he is a member. He cannot now uphold such consensus with a clear conscience when the Council violates the letter and spirit of the UCG governing documents. I think this shows the danger of signing agreements to support the decisions of men. We made a commitment at baptism to obey God - that should be sufficient.

Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA) has been organized, and appears to be a large group being formed. Here is a link to its website:
http://www.cogwa.org/index.html

In the home page for the site is a link for a Sabbath services webcast January 8 at 2:30 pm Eastern time, so members across the country can listen in.

There is also a good FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) page that explains that it replaces Church of God - America, which was a temporary organization. Link:
http://www.cogwa.org/faq.html

The temporary board of directors of COGWA is made up of Michael Hanisko, Ken Giese, Greg Sargent, Roger West, and George Evans. The temporary leadership team includes Jim Franks, Doug Horchak, Clyde Kilough, David Register, and Richard Thompson.

COGWA is hosting a conference in Louisville, KY January 9 through 11 (next Sunday through Tuesday) to make more permanent arrangements. UCG Current Crisis blog published an announcement from COGWA, link here:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5678590-announcement-from-the-communications-team-of-the-cog-awa

COGwriter has reported that the recent holy days offerings in UCG were down from 3.7% to 8%, depending on the particular day, while attendance was down 1.7% to 3.3%. This information comes from the December 2010 issue of United News. These holy day figures are actually better than I expected. Of course, both income and membership must be down much more than that now. But if John Carmack's figure of 60% of the paid ministry leaving UCG is correct, the present UCG may be saving so much money on salaries that it can afford a large drop in income. Link to COGwriter post:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-still-losing/

UCG has published a link to a video that tries to answer questions and there is a transcript of the video. Link here:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/video-from-council-of-elders/

John Carmack has a post with a link to a map that shows the location of those ministers who have left UCG. Link to the Church of God Perspective post:
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2011/01/ucg-in-ne-ohio-shattered.html

UCG Current Crisis has published a post with a link to a pdf document from COGWA giving the timeline of their recent efforts to organize. This is to refute charges from UCG (see December 23 letter) that ministers have behaved in an unethical fashion in organizing a different Church group while in the employment of UCG. The authors of this document are: Jim Franks, Doug Horchak, David Johnson, Clyde Kilough, Richard Pinelli, David Register, Richard Thompson, and Lyle Welty. Link:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5748133-timeline-for-the-establishment-of-church-of-god-a-worldwide-association

UCG has invited UCG ministers to a conference January 31 and February 1 (Monday and Tuesday) in Eastgate, Ohio. Link:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2011/01/05/chairman-and-president-announce-ministerial-conference/

Apparently UCG congregations in South Africa are separating from UCG. UCG Current Crisis blog published a post in which is a letter from several South African pastors to Mr. Rhodes in reply to a letter from Mr. Rhodes in which he says that he and Victor Kubik will be visiting South Africa over the next two weekends. In this letter, the South African ministers say, in effect, that because UCG has cut off the subsidy for their congregations, removed their names from the UCG website, and not answered their inquiries, that Mr. Rhodes and Mr. Kubik are free to try to contact UCG members and arrange to meet with them at some location they may arrange, but they will not be welcome at the regular meeting places for the South African congregations. Link to that post:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5765246-south-african-update

Most of the organizational efforts of those leaving UCG have been temporary. The upcoming conference in Louisville will be an attempt to create large, permanent organization for those leaving UCG. How the governance will be organized is unknown, but I feel sure it will be another version of ballot-box governance. There is no leader who has the standing in the eyes of the members and other leaders to take charge without balloting. No doubt there will be changes though. There will be an effort to learn lessons from the split of UCG by tweaking the rules. My guess is that there will be a governing Council elected by the ministry, but that the seats will be permanent. That is, once elected, you're on the board for life. That would eliminate what may have been a cause for division in UCG, that is, the Council dividing the Church to push ministers out whom they fear would vote them out of office if they have the chance.

But that will not permanently solve the problem.

Not all ministers who are leaving UCG will want to be part of this new group. Probably most of those who have resigned or been removed will want to be. They have burned their bridges behind them. But there will be a few that cannot accept the new arrangement, and they will have to be independent or gather in smaller groupings. Those smaller groups may have top-down government or ballot-box governance. But the large group, Church of God, a Worldwide Association, will probably be governed by the ballot-box.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

New X-UCG Churches Being Organized

2010-12-31T14:55:00.016-06:00

This post will be periodically updated to keep the list of X-UCG Church of God organizations current. Last updated 2/4/11.

The UCG split has entered a phase where many of those who are leaving UCG have already left and are now in the process of getting organized into new Churches of God (or one new Church of God).

Before getting to that, I want to announce that I have set up two new websites.

Church of God Blogs is a listing of a variety of blogs published by members of various Churches of God that have come out of the old Worldwide Church of God and still retain most of Herbert W. Armstrong's teachings. The site is small, listing only about 11 blogs, but I hope to expand it. It is my hope that this can be a convenient place for Church of God members wanting news about events in the Churches of God, or just online fellowship, can find and link to blogs.

Church of God Doctrines is a list of most of Mr. Armstrong's teachings, and for each doctrine, there is a list of scriptures that relate to that doctrine, but without comment or explanation. The idea is that if you want to research a doctrine, you can look up the scriptures and see for yourself what the Bible says, and draw your own conclusions. Comments can be entered, and I hope to expand the list of scriptures for each doctrine. Also, I have included seemingly "contrary" or difficult scriptures so the reader can learn how to answer those and do an unbiased study of any doctrine, as much as possible. We should let the Bible speak for itself and not have the kind of bias in our Bible study that so many in the world have, only looking for scriptures that support what we already believe.

I have consistently taught that our faith for believing our doctrines must be in God and His word, the Bible, rather than in the ministry or in our traditions. This is what I teach in my online book Preaching the Gospel and in this blog. For that to be the case, we need to prove doctrine from the Bible. We should know why we believe what we believe, and our reasons should come from scripture.

This new blog about doctrines and the scriptures that support them primarily focuses on the doctrines taught by the Worldwide Church of God when Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was alive. Most of these doctrines are also taught by various Churches of God that have come out of Worldwide since Mr. Armstrong's death in January 1986.

Links to both of those sites are in the right-hand sidebar column of this blog.

There have been many more resignations of ministers from UCG, and many or most of them will be meeting in the next several days to make plans. Apparently there is an effort to organize as one large group rather than a collection of small fellowships. This is what many of these same ministers had done fifteen years in Indianapolis to organize United Church of God. There will probably be at least one large group, but I am sure not everyone leaving UCG will be a part of it. There is bound to be a few smaller independent groups also.

Church of God - America website has disappeared. That "organization", if you could call it that, was not much more than a website, and now even the website is gone. This does not inspire confidence in those who might consider contributing to International Ambassador Outreach (IAO), which was closely associated with COGA. There are other potential problems with IAO. Probably the biggest one is the ambiguity of who controls it and where the money goes. Originally it was set up to support the Latin American ministry and the poor in that area, and I am sure many have contributed to it intending to help the poor. But now funds can go to pay living expenses of ministers in the United States, some of which may be following different policies and doctrines than a contributor might want to support. It all seems too chancy.
UPDATE: According to Church of God, a Worldwide Association, this was intended to be temporary from the beginning, and is now replaced by COGWA.

I am going to keep a list in this particular post of X-UCG Church of God organizations as they form, and websites as available, just as I am maintaining a list of ministers in my post on "Where UCG Ministers Stand". So far I have:

Church of God - America - dissolved. This was a temporary organization, to be replaced by Church of God, a Worldwide Association. It listed as associated organizations: Church of God - South Texas, Church of God - Canada, Church of God - Latin America, Church of God - Louisiana, and International Ambassador Outreach. It was intended to be a focus for those concerned about events in UCG. See COGWA Frequently Asked Questions page for an explanation about this, link here:
http://www.cogwa.org/faq.html

Church of God - West Palm Beach. According to Shining Light blog, participants include James Cannon, Dan Carriero, Robin Nicholls, David Jenkins, Debra Jenkins, and Michael Moore. Link to Shining Light post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1668

Church of God - South Texas - Jack Hendren. Website:
http://www.cogst.org/

Church of God - Canada - Graemme Marshall. I do not know if this is incorporated, but it was a listing in the "Relationships" page of the old Church of God - America website.

Church of God - Latin America - Leon Walker. Spanish language website:
http://www.iglesiadediosunida.org/

Church of God - Louisiana - Larry Salyer. I do not know if this is incorporated, but it was a listing in the "Relationships" page of the old Church of God - America website.

International Ambassador Outreach. The "Directors" page in their website lists the following: Matthew R. Gus, Chairman; Cliff Demarest, Director; Arnold Cisco Mendez, Sr., Director; Robert L. Paine, II, Director; Larry Salyer, Director: Advisory Board; Ken Geise, Director: Advisory Board; Leon Walker, Latin America Advisor.
Website:
http://www.internationalambassadoroutreach.org/

Church of God, a Worldwide Association. Temporary board of directors includes Michael Hanisko, Ken Giese, Greg Sargent, Roger West, and George Evans. A temporary leadership team includes Jim Franks, Doug Horchak, Clyde Kilough, David Register, Richard Thompson. This group is hosting a conference in Louisville, KY January 9 through 11 to make more permanent arrangements. The website has news, a list of congregations and contact ministers with phone numbers, a blog, and sermons. Website:
http://www.cogwa.org/

COGWA mailing address is in Orlando, Florida.

Here is some information from the COGWA News page
http://www.cogwa.org/news.html

January 10, 2011:
Summary: 60 papers with suggestions on governance were received from members and ministers. Two proposals for governance were voted on by ministers gathered in Louisville for the January 9-11 conference, one, to have all ministers submit 5 names and the top 14 names would be tallied, then 7 would be randomly drawn from a box to form the interim governance team. Two, the existing temporary leadership team would continue as the interim leadership. The second proposal was approved by a vote of 84 to 37. A commitment was made to the 20 fundamental beliefs approved in 1995. Preaching the gospel to the public will rely heavily on the Internet, and there will also be printed literature. Local congregations are encouraged to have local bank accounts, and members may contribute their tithes and offerings locally or to the central organization, although the latter is encouraged. Old UCG policies are in force unless changed.

January 11, 2011:
Ministers gathered in Louisville, Kentucky January 9 through 11 voted 78 out of 118 votes cast to retain "Church of God, a Worldwide Association" as the name of the Church out of a list of five possible names. They are considering about 4-6 Feast sites in the United States. Literature production will start with first-contact literature, which will be put up on the Internet.

January 14, 2011:
Interim Governance Team is made up of Jim Franks, Doug Horchak, Clyde Kilough, David Register, and Richard Thompson. Board of Directors is made up of George Evans, Ken Giese, Mike Hanisko, Greg Sargent, Roger West. Mike Hanisko is board chairman. Clyde Kilough is president.

Jim Franks will supervise pastors and congregations. Richard Thompson will manage finances and the Feast. Doug Horchak will supervise international areas. David Register will handle communications and youth camps. Clyde Kilough will manage preaching the gospel to the public.

There is a member letter dated January 20, 2011 in the members page that goes into detail about guidelines and instructions for local congregations in the handling of finances and contributions. Link:
http://www.cogwa.org/members.html

I will update this list with ministers, websites, and new churches as the situation develops.

There have been a number of resignations. According to Shining Light blog, the following ministers have resigned or been removed from the ministry (or fired) in this past week:

Jeff Caudle
Art Verschoor
Andre van Belkum
Paul Suckling
Ed Jacobs
John Lusk
Harold Rhodes
Melton McNeely
Ed Oliver
Don Thomas
Dempsey B. Bruton III
Martin Cole
Leroy Neff
Ken Treybig
Dan Anderson
Dave Baker
Bill Jahns
Alan Pachinger
Gary McConnaughey
Jack Willoughby
Ed Oliver
Fred Davidson
Mark Hampton
Jim McTiernan
David Treybig
Glenn O. Harmon
Flavious Adkins
Don Henson
Tom Diaz
Donald Erickson
King Finley
Steve Ferenchiak
Alonzo Gjesvold
Todd Carey
James W. Hudson
Michael Machin
Tom Kirkpatrick
Mark Winner
Alton Head
Greg Swartz
Lyle Welty
Mike Blackwell
Thomas Seltzer
Britt Taylor
John Pentlin
Joel Meeker
David Smith
Don Shaw
John Foster
Dick King
David Jackson
Alton Head
Don Waterhouse
Larry Greider
Kingsley Mather
Bob Peoples

Link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1844

UPDATES 1/7/11:

I have added details about a number of organizations forming from those leaving UCG, including names of ministers or directors associated with those groups. Church of God - America is dissolved, to be replaced by Church of God, a Worldwide Association. I have added that organization to my list, and I have also listed websites for each group when available.

UPDATES 2/4/11:

I have added more information about COGWA from their website.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Should We Trust God's Ministers?

2010-12-24T15:19:00.002-06:00

The Bible teaches that we should put our trust in God, not men.

"Do not put your trust in princes, Nor in a son of man, in whom there is no help" (Psalm 146:3).

"Cursed is the man who trusts in man And makes flesh his strength, Whose heart departs from the LORD" (Jeremiah 17:5). Rather, we are to trust God (verse 7).

Ministers are men, and we are to put our trust in God, not men, not even ministers. But we are to respect ministers and respect the offices they hold (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13, Philippians 2:29-30, Hebrews 13:17).

Nowhere are we instructed or commanded to "TRUST" any men, even God's ministers.

Trust comes in degrees. There is a kind of limited trust that we can give to other people. I trust that when I give the cashier at a store a $20 bill to pay for a $2.24 purchase, she will give me $17.76 in change, not $2.76 claiming I only gave her a five dollar bill so she can pocket the difference. Yet I know there is a chance that can happen. (In fact, something similar did happen to me at a fast food restaurant years ago.) If I know someone well, such as a family member, friend, co-worker, or Church member, I can trust that person more (or less) than a stranger. But I always know that a human being, any human being, can make mistakes or sin, sometimes in surprising ways.

I am reminded of this after reading a post by John Carmack in COG Perspective blog, then reading a post by John Elliot in the blog for his UCG congregation.

Here is a post from John Carmack:
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2010/12/why-i-cannot-be-ucg-dove.html

Here is the post from John Elliot in a UCG congregational site:
http://phoenix-east.ucg.org/blog/matters-difference-between-ministers

Mr. Elliot warns his readers that any members of his congregation who spread "concerns" that Mr. Elliot regards as misinformation will be told to stay home until they "work through their distrust of Church leadership". In other words, he is teaching his members that they should trust the ministry at UCG headquarters.

This statement by John Elliot comes across to me as a declaration of war against members of his congregation who obey God's word to put their trust in God, not men. It is not that he is wrong to teach his members to show respect to the office of the ministry by not harshly criticizing the ministers in the church they attend. But it is the reason he gives. He wants them to TRUST the leadership. That is wrong, according to the Bible. That kind of trust we should give only to God.

I would imagine some members of Mr. Elliot's congregation will face a conscience problem attending his congregation, especially if they feel they are hearing the voice of a stranger coming between them and God, not the voice of Christ (John 10:1-5).

Ministers are human. They make mistakes. Some of them sin. We are to respect them, to respect the office they hold, to obey them when such obedience does not come into conflict with God's law, but we are not to put our trust and faith in them. Trust and faith should be given to God alone.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1

How to Understand the Bible, Chapter 1

Focusing on the Bible, Chapter 5

Practicing What We Preach, Chapter 6

Changing Doctrine, Chapter 6

A Lesson from the Autobiography, Chapter 6

The Source of Our Beliefs, Chapter 6

Faith, Chapter 6

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

Resignations, New Churches, and UCG Letter

2010-12-24T15:05:00.001-06:00

Resignations from UCG continue. Among them are Roger West, Roy Demarest, Clyde Kilough, Doug Horchak, Andy Burnett, Neil Hart, Arnold Burns, Jim Franks, Bruce Gore, Larry Lambert, Cecil Maranville, Richard Thompson, David Register, Paul Luecke, David Charles McCarble, Frank Robert Pierce, Bob Mitchell, Steve Villaescusa, John Richard Seiver, Jim Servidio, Jim Springer and Phillip Sandilands, according to posts in the Shining Light blog. Here are links to those posts:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1668

http://theshininglight.info/?p=1717

Church of God Perspective blog also reports some of these resignations, link:
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2010/12/more-ucg-ministers-resign.html

These are major names and they show that the split in UCG is major and definite.

There are also new Churches of God forming.

The Church of God-West Palm Beach has started, and includes as officers or directors James Cannon, Dan Carriero, Robin Nicholls, David Jenkins, Debra Jenkins, and Michael Moore, according to Shining Light blog. Link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1668

Shining Light blog also has published information and letters about a split in the Orlando Church of God. Link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1717

Other new Churches of God forming by those leaving UCG include Church of God, a Worldwide Association, as reported by UCG Current Crisis blog, link:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5678590-announcement-from-the-communications-team-of-the-cog-awa

It appears that UCG ministers are not leaving UCG in a united way as they left Worldwide in 1995. There will not be one organization, but many.

One thing I have not seen yet is any news of a pastor leaving UCG going directly into another large, existing organization, such as Living Church of God. But it may be easier for some pastors to function independently of a large group during a transitional period, and then join with a different group later.

UCG Current Crisis blog has reported that Joel Meeker has declined a seat on the Council of Elders, and gives a link to a letter from Mr. Meeker in .pdf format. Link to UCG Current Crisis post:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5674158-joel-meeker-declines-coe-position
Link to letter from Joel Meeker:
http://www.freewebs.com/ucgcurrentcrisis/Letter%20to%20Melvin%20Rhodes%2012%202010.pdf

In this letter, Mr. Meeker points out that he has signed a Council Code of Ethics agreement in 1998 in which he agrees to uphold decisions made by the majority of the Council if he is a member. He now cannot, in good conscience, be a member of the Council knowing he cannot uphold decisions he knows are wrong and contrary to God's law. If he becomes a member, he is stuck between two unacceptable things: support the Council majority decisions thus breaking God's law, or not support them thus violating his signed agreement.

I think this shows the unwisdom of signing agreements to support the decisions of men. At baptism, we vowed to obey God and the Bible. We should not sign agreements that can bring us into conflict with that vow. That is a trap.

If it has been a requirement for Council members to sign such an agreement, then every Council member has been compromised I think if they remain on a Council they cannot support.

UCG has published a letter to the ministry and membership of UCG from Mr. Melvin Rhodes and Mr. Dennis Luker. Here is a link to that letter:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/23/dec-23-letter-to-ministers-and-members/

In this letter, they say that they believe the current crisis in UCG is nearing its end. I do not know what they have in mind, but I do not think it is near its end.

They state their belief that God lead the formation of UCG as an organization in Indianapolis 15 years ago. I ask, based on what evidence?

Did God lead the ministry to form UCG as an organization lead by the balloting of the all the elders? I do not think so. That would be contrary to the examples of the Bible and contrary to the fruits of where that decision has led.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

What Really Is Church of God - America?

2010-12-21T12:11:00.007-06:00

First the news.

Shining Light blog has reported that Richard Thompson has resigned from UCG. The same post reports that "Church of God, Orlando, Inc." has been formed, but I have no website for that church yet. Link to that post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1684

Another Shining Light post reports on the resignations of Clyde Kilough, Roy Demarest, and Roger West, and reports some detail about a new Church of God, "The Church of God-West Palm Beach Incorporated", with Mr. James Cannon as president of the corporation. Other people involved include Dan Carriero treasurer, Robin Nicholls secretary, and David and Debra Jenkins and Michael Moore as directors, according to the post. I know of no website for that church yet. Link to Shining Light post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1668

Other blogs have also reported the resignations of Roger West, Roy Demarest and Clyde Kilough.
Link to Church of God Perspective post:
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2010/12/more-ucg-ministers-resign.html
Link to COGwriter post:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucgs-former-president-and-others-resign/

What, in essence, is Church of God - America?

It is not a church or a corporation, nor does it intend to become one, according to the statements in its website. So what is it?

If you take it at face value, it is basically a voluntary association and a website that expresses the intention of a group of independent pastors to cooperate along certain agreed lines. There is no binding legal authority over the pastors I have found. It is not incorporated, and it pays no salaries to ministers, as far as I know. The group of ministers are basically making a voluntary commitment to each other to help each other and work together along certain lines. You can read the details in their website. There is a shared statement of beliefs for example, and a commitment to a Bible reading program specified in the website. The site provides a common platform for contact information and links to websites for the member pastors. It is a point of communication.

Here is a link to the site:
http://www.cogamerica.org/

Here is the email address for the site:
cogamerica@earthlink.net

The domain "cogamerica.org" was created 11/9/2010. The registrant and administrator of the website is Jasper Hendren in Corpus Christi, Texas. This means he has physical control of the website.

Pastors may receive, and probably do, compensation from International Ambassador Outreach. How much influence that has on the pastors, they know. But they may also receive compensation directly from the members of their congregations. There is nothing I have found in the website that indicates that pastors cannot incorporate locally if they wish, so I assume that member pastors can locally incorporate and collect tithes from their members.

Those are the tangibles. The intangible characteristics of the association depend on the intents, plans, and promises of the ministers who make up the association. They are not visible, and not fully known to everyone at this time.

It can be viewed as an organization, but probably a loosely controlled one. And if it is strongly controlled by someone, such as Mr. Leon Walker, it is only to the extent that member pastors voluntarily follow his lead.

Because it is a voluntary organization, it is also changeable. Like the proverbial glass that is half full or half empty, this can be viewed as good or bad. You can say it is flexible or you can say it is unstable. Where this leads, whether it bears good fruit or bad fruit, really depends on the intent and character of its members and leaders and to the extent they submit to Christ and Christ works through them. It can be a transitional form, one to be replaced with something a little different later. It can also be transitional for pastors and congregations, in that a local pastor may join this association now, then leave it later if the relationship is no longer needed and no longer useful.

Potentially, this might be something similar to an idea I wrote about in my post How the Church Can Be Organized. Or, it might be something else.

But one thing is clear. The pastors that make up this association no longer report or are responsible to UCG's ballot-box governance. I do not say they are not responsible to the balloting of men. Each Church of God led by a pastor can be organized with ballot-box governance, even at the local level. The pastor can organize the collection of congregations he pastors so that the elders elect him, and can remove him, by ballot, if that is how the pastor wants his congregations to be organized. He can even submit to the voting of the membership, as Church of God (Seventh Day) does. Or he can govern them from the top down, reporting directly to Christ.

I think it would be a mistake for any pastor coming out of UCG to organize a system of governance by the balloting of men and to submit to that kind of system. I hope UCG ministers are learning better.

In my book, Preaching the Gospel, I wrote a section on How Is the Church Organized. In that section, I show from scripture and with diagrams how Christ leads the Church three ways: how He leads us to salvation individually, how He leads the family through the husband, and how He leads the administrative, organized work of the Church through the ministry. In that section I show a diagram of how Christ leads the organized work of the Church.

Now, suppose the individual pastors of congregations or groups of congregations associated through COGA do not organize their groups by ballot-box like the system they are leaving but instead practice top-down government, reporting directly to Christ. And suppose they do not allow themselves to be unduly influenced by the wishes of those in IAO who may provide some of their financing, but are only influenced by their desire to do God's will and obey Christ and believe and obey the Bible. If that is the case, then I could modify my diagram from my book to represent this structure, like this:

(Click on image to enlarge)

This is just an example. Only God knows the hearts of all men, if they are serving Him or themselves. God knows who obeys Christ and who does not.

Or, if Mr. Walker is faithful to Christ, and if Christ chooses him to becomes the leader over the other pastors, you might end up with this:

Or, in a worst case situation (in my opinion), if the ministers have learned nothing from their experience in UCG with ballot-box governance, you could have this:

There are many questions not yet answered.

How does International Ambassador Outreach decide who receives funds and how much? What is their criteria? Are there doctrinal and policy requirements pastors and elders must comply with before IAO will give them support? And who runs IAO? Who decides the criteria for who will receive support and who will not? The IAO website is not clear, at least to me. There is a board. Is it just the board of directors that determines this, collectively, by voting? If so, then you have ballot-box governance over the disbursement of funds. And if those funds influence the decisions of the pastors who receive those funds, then you have at least the potential influence of the ballot-box over the pastors, if not the actual rule over them. And if Mr. Walker controls the members IAO's board, how does he do it?

Over time, if a pastor is faithful to obey Christ, the fruits of his decisions will become known. If God is working through a particular pastor, and He wants this known to the Church of God, He can bless that pastor with wisdom and intervention to make his decisions prosper. "And the LORD said to Joshua, 'This day I will begin to exalt you in the sight of all Israel, that they may know that, as I was with Moses, so I will be with you' " (Joshua 3:7). "So Samuel grew, and the LORD was with him and let none of his words fall to the ground. And all Israel from Dan to Beersheba knew that Samuel had been established as a prophet of the LORD" (1 Samuel 3:19-20). In this way, God can reveal who He has chosen by the fruits, not by the balloting of men.

You have four leading men, at this writing, who lead Churches of God who are part of Church of God - America: Leon Walker, Jack Hendren, Larry Salyer, and Graemme Marshall. Suppose, just as an example (I know little about most of these men, so I am just picking a name here to illustrate the example), that Christ has chosen Mr. Marshall to lead the other men in a combined organization. Christ could make His choice known, not by the balloting of men, but by fruits. God could bless Mr. Marshall with a greater measure of wisdom, blessings, success, and good fruits, and over time those fruits would make evident whom Christ has chosen. Those who are willing to recognize the biblical way of knowing whom God has chosen would recognize the fruits and would cooperate with Mr. Marshall more and more. Or, if Christ chooses one of the other men, or someone who joins Church of God - America later, He could make His choice known the same way, by fruits, not by balloting.

There are many unanswered questions, and a great deal of change is is likely.

I would advise any pastor joining the Church of God - America association to keep his options open.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Who Rules UCG?

2010-12-18T18:58:00.000-06:00

Who is in charge of United Church of God, the COE or the GCE?

I asked this question in the opinion poll in the upper right-hand corner of this blog. Which is the highest human authority in UCG, the Council of Elders or the General Conference of Elders?

John Carmack asked a question in a comment about whether I am asking who should be in charge or who actually is in charge. Most readers can answer the poll either way, but I can only answer about who really is in charge, that is, who actually has the power. I cannot answer who SHOULD have the power and authority because, since I do not believe in governance by voting, I cannot honestly say that I think either the COE or the GCE "should" be in charge.

So who is in charge and has the actual power as granted by the articles of incorporation, the bylaws, and any other legal documents that govern how authority in UCG works?

I think the Council of Elders (COE) is in charge. It rules over the GCE. The COE is the highest authority in UCG.

Why?

The COE is more powerful.

Why is the COE more powerful?

It can act more quickly. In a power struggle between the COE and the GCE, the COE will win, provided the COE members are quick enough and ruthless enough to do what they need to do to win. The COE can run rings around the GCE when it wants to in order to hold control of UCG.

Why is the COE quicker?

Mainly, it is quicker because it is smaller. And the COE can change and shape the GCE faster than the GCE can change the COE.

The GCE can change the composition of the COE in the next election. But before that, the COE will change the composition of the GCE to shape the results of that election. It is already happening. The COE can remove members of the GCE it doesn't want by dismissing them from the ministry and revoking their ministerial credentials so they can't vote. The COE can also add new members to the GCE it wants by approving ordinations to the ministry. It can do that now, and does not have to wait till the next election. It is doing it already. The fight will be over before May, I think.

This sounds cynical, but that is the power the ministry gave to the COE when UCG was organized more than 15 years ago. Now the COE is using that power. And by including the process by which the Council members can be installed or removed by the vote of the GCE, the ministry has built the conflict of a struggle for power and control into the governance structure of the Church. They didn't do that intentionally, but that is the result nevertheless.

Democracy in action.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

New Church of God Association and Website - Church of God - America

2010-12-17T15:16:00.003-06:00

There is a new Church of God organization and website called "Church of God - America, Anchored in Scripture" as reported by several blogs. Here is a link to their website:
http://www.cogamerica.org/

Post in Shining Light blog (James Malm):
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1612

Post Church of God Perspective blog (John Carmack):
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2010/12/church-of-godamerica-anchored-in.html

This group is a voluntary association of pastors and elders, not a Church of God corporation, and it does not plan to become incorporated, according to its website. It seems to be a kind of loose association, not claiming authority over individual Churches of God that are in the association. It is based on common commitments to certain principles.

I have not studied its statement of beliefs in detail, but what I have seen seems to be regular Church of God doctrine, nothing unusual. The website states that preaching the gospel is one of the objectives of the association or its member churches, and suggests the Internet as a way that the member churches can do this.

In its statement of beliefs, there is no clear statement about the doctrine of the identity of the lost tribes of Israel being the English speaking and other European nations, but there is a statement that God has blessed the children of Abraham.

Although Church of God - America is not incorporated, the Churches of God that are listed in its website may be. I think a church needs to be incorporated in order to accept tax-deductible contributions, so this will probably be done at the level of the individual Churches of God in the association. Some pastors in the association may elect to receive compensation from International Ambassador Outreach (which would be tax deductible I think), or from their local members directly without the benefit of being tax deductible if they do not incorporate, and this could be temporary.

Here are the Churches of God and organizations listed in its relationship page:
Link to relationship page:
http://www.cogamerica.org/page6/relationships.html

International Ambassador Outreach. Link:
http://www.internationalambassadoroutreach.org/

Church of God - Latin America - Leon Walker. Link (Spanish language site):
http://www.iglesiadediosunida.org/

Church of God - South Texas - Jack Hendren. Link:
http://www.cogst.org/

Church of God - Louisiana - Larry Salyer. Link:
http://www.cogamerica.org/page11/page11.html

Church of God - Canada - Graemme Marshall. Link:
http://www.cogamerica.org/page8/page8.html

Other UCG news:

UCG has complained about unauthorized use of its logo in documents published by those not in agreement with headquarters policies in their Inside United Realtime blog, and this has been commented about in several other blogs. Link to UCG post:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/illegal-use-of-united-church-of-god-name-and-logo/

Church of God Perspective post (John Carmack):
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2010/12/alleged-illegal-use-of-ucg-logo.html

COGwriter post (Bob Thiel):
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-illegal-use-of-logo-etc/

Shining Light blog has reported that Roy Demarest has been suspended. Link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1612

There is a Facebook page that allows UCG members to sign in their support of the open letter to Mr. Dennis Luker.
Link to post in Church of God Perspective blog:
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2010/12/i-support-letter-on-ucg-facebook.html

Post in COGwriter:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-crisis-appears-to-be-growing/

Other COG news:

Bob Thiel reported that a weekly news radio show called "Head's Up" featured an interview with Mr. Roderick Meredith of Living Church of God. Link to COGwriter post:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/dr-meredith-on-heads-up-radio/

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Now It's YOUR Chance to Vote

2010-12-15T10:16:00.007-06:00

Who is in charge of UCG, the Council of Elders (COE) or the General Conference of Elders (GCE)? Which of these two bodies is the highest authority?

You can find statements made by UCG ministers and writers both ways. Some have said that the Council is the highest authority and some have said that the General Conference of Elders, the whole ministry, is the highest authority.

Which is it?

One could make a case either way.

You could say that the Council is the highest authority and rules over the general ministry. It is the Council that chooses who will be members of the GCE by approving ordinations. It is the Council that can remove ministers from the GCE by revoking their ministerial credentials. Therefore the Council decides who will be in the GCE and who will not. Moreover, the Council appoints the administration, and the administration supervises the ministers and can order them to transfer.

The power and authority of the COE over the GCE is illustrated in the diagram below.

On the other hand, you could say that the GCE, the collective ministry, has authority over and rules the Council. It is the GCE that has the authority to elect members on the Council by balloting them into office or to remove them by balloting them out of office. It is the GCE that has the final say in approving or disapproving measures that must come up for ballot (such as the move to Dallas), and the GCE also has the authority to put issues up for ballot.

The power and authority of the GCE over the COE is illustrated in the diagram below.

You may vote your opinion in the poll in the upper right-hand corner of this blog.

In a future post I will give my opinion on which of these two bodies is in charge.

The struggle between two bodies, each claiming authority over the other, is an important part of the split that is occurring in United Church of God.

In the near future there is likely to be more dismissals of ministers by the Council as well as approvals by the Council of ordinations to add new ministers to the GCE. The make up of the GCE is thus being changed by the Council.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Three New Papers are Published

2010-12-14T21:26:00.000-06:00

The UCG Current Crisis blog has published three documents from some signers of the December 4 letter summarizing actions of the Council of Elders over about the last year and a half and answering some of the things said and written by Mr. Dennis Luker.

These seem to be important documents.

Here is a link to the post:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5600154-new-documents-from-the-gce

Here are direct links to the documents. Each is a .pdf file which may be downloaded:
What Really Happened In Latin America?:
http://www.freewebs.com/ucgcurrentcrisis/WhatReallyHappenedInLatinAmerica.pdf

What Are The Real Issues?:
http://www.freewebs.com/ucgcurrentcrisis/WhatAreTheRealIssues.pdf

What Were the Real Efforts to Seek Reconciliation?:
http://www.freewebs.com/ucgcurrentcrisis/WhatWeretheRealEffortstoSeekReconciliation.pdf

As I read these documents, I got a definite sense of action in the wind, that these documents are declaring the reasons for actions yet to be taken. The document titled "What Are The Real Issues?" reads as a list of grievances such as one might find in the United States Declaration of Independence. Just as the Declaration of Independence set the stage for a war of independence that severed the authority of England over its American colonies and created the United States of America, so these documents may be setting the stage for some kind of action leading to total separation of those who will not or cannot follow the Council's agenda.

The United States Declaration of Independence starts out, "When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." No such preamble starts any of the documents prepared by UCG ministers, but I almost get the sense that the statement, "they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation" may be implied.

I have said before that I expected most of the split in United Church of God to run its course before Passover, 2011. Most organizational changes in the Church of God seem to happen after the Feast of Tabernacles and before Passover, not during a holy day season. Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong started a work separate from Church of God (Seventh Day) late 1933 and early 1934. Mr. Armstrong died and Joseph Tkach became pastor general of Worldwide in January 1986. Mr. Roderick Meredith started Global Church of God after the Feast in 1992 and before Passover 1993. United Church of God was started just before Passover 1995. David Hulme and UCG went separate ways after the Feast 1997 and before Passover 1998. Larry Salyer and Raymond McNair took control of Global Church of God and Mr. Meredith started Living Church of God shortly after the Feast in 1998.

These documents summarize what has happened from the beginning of the split, and they build a case that the actions of the Council and administration have been unethical, unchristian, and illegal. This may be a preparation for something.

The last paragraph of the document titled "What Were the Real Efforts to Seek Reconciliation?" says that the issues that divide UCG have nothing to do with governance structure, but rather unethical and abusive behavior, implication being that this wrong behavior is on the part of the Council. Now, it may be true that the DIRECT issues that are causing division are not about governance structure, but indirectly they may be. If, as this document alleges, the wrong behavior of the Council is the heart and core of the issues that divide UCG, then the cause of that wrong behavior is the present make up of the Council. In other words, it is WHO is on the Council that determines the actions of the Council. If the division is the results of wrong actions by the Council over the last year and a half, then those actions have taken place because the majority of the Council members were willing to take those wrong actions. The real issue is, who are the Council members? Are they ethically qualified to lead the Church?

And if the answer is "no", then the next question is, "who put them there?"

And the answer to that question has very much to do with the structure of governance.

The twelve original apostles were chosen by Jesus Christ after He spent all night in prayer to know the Father's will (Luke 6:12-16, John 15:16), and one became an enemy, who was appointed for a purpose (John 6:70-71, Acts 1:15-17). The current UCG Council members were chosen by the balloting of about 500 ministers in a process that gives the majority the legal power to force its will on the minority.

You cannot separate the fruits of that process from the choice of that process and say, "It doesn't matter" (Luke 6:43-44).

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Where Is the Evidence?

2010-12-14T09:38:00.001-06:00

Mr. Dennis Luker has replied in Inside United Realtime blog to the open letter submitted to him December 4. Here is a link to that post:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/14/reply-to-the-open-letter/

Here is a link to the open letter he is replying to:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5551307-an-open-letter-to-the-president-of-the-united-church-of-god

In Mr. Luker's reply, he calls on the signers of the open letter to bring back their loyalty to the governing structure that Christ has built in United since 1995.

I would like to ask a simple question of Mr. Luker, or of those who support UCG governance structure.

What evidence is there that Christ built the governing structure of United Church of God?

I think the evidence is that Christ did NOT build the governing structure of UCG, but that the governance of UCG was built by men, and Christ allowed it to teach us hard lessons.

"For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints" (1 Corinthians 14:33).

"For a good tree does not bear bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit" (Luke 6:43-44).

There is a direct relationship between setting UCG up to be governed by a voting process and the current division within UCG. It is voting and the struggle for voting that is fueling and driving this division.

Ballot-box governance is a bad tree that is bearing bad fruit.

The Church of God should be learning its lessons from this.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Larry Salyer and International Ambassador Outreach (IAO) Website

2010-12-13T11:51:00.006-06:00

Mr. Larry Salyer is listed in the directors page of the International Ambassador Outreach (IAO) website, along with Arnold Mendez, Sr. and Leon Walker.

Review of IAO website:

The site states that it is not a church nor will it become one, but that it was set up to meet the financial needs of Church of God congregations around the world. Originally intended to meet the needs of areas outside the United States, it now intends to provide financial assistance to ministers in the United States during a time of transition due to the current UCG crisis. It also lists as one of its goals to provide financial assistance for the preaching of the gospel to the world through various means such as print, the Internet, and electronic media, so I presume that part of the money contributed by IAO to local pastors and their congregations can be used for the purpose of preaching the gospel to the world.

The site states "IAO will be making application for exemption to the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to have them declare IAO [EIN 27-3007906] exempt from federal income tax as an organization described in section 501(c)(3)."

Donations made as of December 5th, 2010 can be used by IAO for the United States congregations and pastors as well as International areas.

There is no information about how IAO is governed, but I would expect that it is governed collectively by the board of directors. In their directors page, six names are listed: Matthew R. Gus, Cliff Demarest, Arnold Cisco Mendez, Sr., Robert L. Paine, II, Larry Salyer, and Leon Walker. There is a portrait and a short biography of each man. Matthew Gus is the chairman. Larry Salyer is listed as "Director: Advisory Board". Leon Walker is listed as "Latin America Advisor". The other men are listed as "Director". All are members of the Church of God. The site states that the bylaws will be made available after approval of legal counsel.

Quarterly financial reports are made available on the website.

The address of IAO is:

International Ambassador Outreach
P.O. Box 251566
Plano, TX 75025-1566

Links:
http://www.internationalambassadoroutreach.org/

The same content is shown in this domain:
http://www.iaoutreach.org/

Director's page:
http://www.internationalambassadoroutreach.org/directors.htm

Post in Shining Light blog:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1553

All I can say is that it will be interesting to see how this develops. This may be a new Church of God organizational model in embryo. I remember that when United Church of God first began to be organized in a meeting or series of meetings in Indiana in 1995, some wanted a more loosely organized church than UCG became, one where local congregations had more autonomy and a headquarters organization and staff was to primarily serve those congregations and their pastors rather than exercise authority over them. IAO may be the start of that kind of organization.

In an unrelated matter, UCG Current Crisis blog has published a letter from Mr. David Jackson, a local elder in Columbia, Maryland, to the Council of Elders and administration, about his concerns after seeing the situation of the Church of God in Chile. In the letter, he describes the suffering in the Church of God in Chile because of the division that has occurred.

Here is a link to that post:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5583503-a-servant-s-plea-for-chile-a-ucg-elders-personal-visit

The number of names approving the open letter to Mr. Dennis Luker first sent December 4 as published in the UCG Current Crisis blog continues to grow. It is up to 126 names as of this writing, up from 120 about a day and a half ago.

This letter may be intended to let ministers get an idea of about how many will be signing the petition for a proposal for an investigation to be put up for ballot. The signatories of that petition are being tallied by an independent CPA firm and the names will not be made known until the tally is complete and if the requirement of 25% of the GCE (GCE is about 480 names) is reached. If everyone who has signed this letter also signs the petition, that figure has already been met, NOT COUNTING any ordinations that are made of new ministers and members of the GCE. One of the orders of business of the COE in its meetings was the approval of requests for ordinations, and there has been no news on that front. But the Council only approves the ordinations. The actual ordinations usually take place locally at Sabbath services with the congregations present, so they may be announced in the near future. Ordinations that may have been made last Sabbath may be announced by the administration at any time, and ordinations that may be made next Sabbath may be announced next week. New ordinations will expand the size of the GCE, requiring more signatures on the petition to meet the 25% requirement.

COGwriter blog has reported that a number of UCG members in the Kansas City area, pastored by Mr. Ed Dowd, have left apart from Mr. Dowd, possibly as many as 2/3 of the congregation. This would be the first time I know of in this crisis that a large group of members have left on their own, not being led by a minister. Bob Thiel's report is based on emails he has received and on letters from members published by the UCG Current Crisis site. Apparently, COG members David Yee and Sarah Yee published a letter in Facebook critical of UCG pastor Ed Dowd. The letter expresses the view that Mr. Dowd and the current UCG administration seem to be increasingly Protestant in the flavor of their teachings. Arlene Henderson indicated in Facebook that she liked the letter, and in a meeting with Mr. Dowd confirmed that she still liked the letter. She was then suspended, according to her daughter, Diane Martin, in a letter from Diane and Howard Martin in the UCG Current Crisis website, member letters page.

It is not in the nature of things for a large group of people to remain long without a leader. If the number of people who left the Kansas City congregation is as large as 2/3, or large at all, if they stay together, either they will find a pastor or a leader will emerge from among them. They may go in different directions in small groups, perhaps attending or visiting other Church of God fellowships, such as LCG, and some of them may stay home for a while or gather in small groups in their homes for fellowship on the Sabbath, perhaps listening to recorded sermons for a while until they find a more permanent solution.

Here is a link to the COGwriter post:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-loses-in-kansas-city/
Here is a link to the UCG Current Crisis members letters page which publishes letters from Diane and Howard Martin and from David and Sarah Yee:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/lettersfrommembers.htm

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Leon Walker Reply to UCG Council of Elders, How a Split Might Occur

2010-12-11T21:41:00.002-06:00

Mr. Leon Walker has replied point-by-point to a post published by the UCG Council of Elders and administration. Here is a link to the original UCG official post:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/latin-american-ministry-reconciliation/
Here is a link to a post in UCG Current Crisis blog that publishes Mr. Walker's reply:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5573482-leon-walkers-response-to-the-letter-from-the-coe

Shining Light blog has published a post indicating that Mr. Mike Hanisko has been suspended and told not to attend Sabbath services. Here is a link to that post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1543

More names continue to be added to the list of ministers endorsing the December 4 letter that was sent to Mr. Dennis Luker published in the UCG Current Crisis blog. The list of names is now up to 120. I will continue to add the names to my post titled Where UCG Ministers Stand to keep it up-to-date. Here is a link in the UCG Current Crisis blog:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5551307-an-open-letter-to-the-president-of-the-united-church-of-god

Not every minister that has concerns or disagrees with the current direction of the Council and administration in United Church of God has necessarily signed this letter or any other document expressing concern, nor will they necessarily sign such documents in the future. The absence of a pastor's name therefore does not indicate that he agrees with the Council.

Why would a minister not take a stand at this time?

Some may be motivated to try to avoid controversy and stay in UCG out of legitimate concerns for the welfare of their local flock. Almost every time a pastor leaves UCG, whether it be because he is removed or resigns, it means his local congregation is split, sometimes down the middle, sometimes into a larger and a smaller piece. In just about any congregation, there will be some members who feel duty bound to stay in UCG and there will be some who feel just as strongly that they should stay with the pastor who has been caring for them and teaching them for years. A split in a congregation is always hard on many members in that congregation. In order to shield the members from division and to help the congregation stay together and to be able to teach and feed all of the local members, to care for Christ's sheep, some pastors may simply choose to avoid making waves, avoid controversy as much as possible, and to concentrate on teaching their congregations solid, biblical doctrine as they have been doing for years. Each minister must weigh a number of factors concerning his particular situation and what is best for the members he cares for as well as what is best for the Church as a whole, and we should be cautious about judging any pastor's decision in this, since we do not have all the facts he has regarding his situation. It is each pastor's decision, not anyone else's, and he has to seek God's will in making that decision. When a minister prays to God for the wisdom to make that decision, it seems to me that God will more likely give that wisdom to the pastor who asks for it and who has the responsibility for making the decision than to onlookers who may be looking for a reason to criticize and accuse, but do not have to make the decision themselves.

The cumulative effect of this is that the collective body of those who disagree with the Council's agenda are themselves split in how to handle it, with some wanting to take an open stand to reform UCG or to form a new organization and others choosing to keep silent and continue to pastor their congregations with a minimum of local controversy and division.

So if UCG splits, with 1/3 leaving and forming a new organization and 2/3 staying in UCG, that does not mean that all 2/3 of the ministers who stay in UCG agree with the policies of the current Council and administration.

Another interesting development is the possible formation of a "shadow government" within UCG, now perhaps in embryo stage. There is a funding organization, "International Ambassador Outreach" (IAO), which can channel tax-exempt donations from any contributors to any UCG or former-UCG ministers whose salaries have been cut off by UCG and are in need of financial support, whether those ministers be in the United States or other parts of the world. There is also the petition that is being circulated among UCG ministers to take a ballot on the proposal to have an investigation into recent actions by the Council and administration that may have led to the division. It will require 25% of the GCE, as tabulated by an independent CPA firm, to approve putting the proposal up for ballot. Then it would require 50% of those who vote on the ballot to approve the investigation. Yet the Council has said that this entire proposal is legally flawed, suggesting they may not abide by the results!

This could be interesting.

The independent CPA firm was chosen and contracted by the supporters of the proposal, but not by the Council and administration. This CPA firm will announce its results in due time. If the 25% is attained, then the COE and administration will have to make a choice to honor that decision or declare it invalid and void. If they honor it, they will have to reverse their position that the whole process is legally flawed. They will also have no legal excuse for disciplining any minister who supported it. But if they declare it illegal and void, then there may be a ballot not administered by the UCG administration, but by the sponsors of the proposal, perhaps using the same CPA firm to tally the ballots. In such a case, the Council of Elders and administration will no doubt instruct ministers to not participate in that ballot.

But that itself will have consequences, because as I understand it (someone correct me if I am wrong), the 50% required to approve the proposal is not 50% of the entire GCE but 50% OF THOSE WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE VOTING. So if the entire General Conference of Elders is 480 men, with about 160 (1/3) supporting the resolution and 320 (2/3) supporting the Council, and if the 320 who support the Council obey the Council's instructions not to participate, then only the 160 who support the resolution will vote, and they are guaranteed to have about 100% majority to approve the proposal. But if the Council advises ministers to vote against the proposal, then they are acknowledging the validity of the proposal going to ballot!

Once approved, the sponsors and supporting ministers of the proposal can go ahead with the investigation according to the terms of the proposal, which have been detailed in advance, and the investigation in due time will publish its results. The investigation can proceed without the cooperation of the Council and its allies using published documents and testimony of those willing to cooperate with the investigation. By not cooperating, the Council will cut itself off from defending itself. But if it cooperates, it acknowledges the validity of the investigation and the entire process that led to it.

The results of the investigation can be published outside of official COE and administration channels just as many documents have, on the Internet.

This whole process can become a model or pattern, a test case if you will, for those who disagree with the Council and its agenda. The supporters of this proposal will claim that it is legal and has force, and the Council will claim it is not legal.

Now, an investigation is just an investigation, but if the process were applied to something else, such as recall votes for the Council members or a re-examination or proposed changes in the bylaws and rules of governance for the corporation, the legal consequences will be more serious. Such a process could be used to vote out of office current Council members and elect a new Council. Then you will have two bodies, each claiming to be the "real" Council of Elders, and each claiming legal control over the corporation and its assets.

If it reaches that point, the current Council will remain in control unless the new Council files a lawsuit in the courts. The "alternative Council" may chose not to do that based on 1 Corinthians 6:1-8. But even if it does not file suit, it may have its own source of funds, based on local contributions and based on funding channeled through International Ambassador Outreach. This split can thus proceed gradually. Eventually, a new corporation may form. Or, the new Council may file a lawsuit against the old Council for control of the assets, and a worldly court will sort this mess out. In fact, in matters of voting and democracy, a worldly court may actually be more qualified to judge this matter since they have more experience in resolving matters of voting than the Church of God. In other words, if the Church is going to adopt the world's way of governance, it may need the help of the world's courts to resolve disputes within that form of governance.

United Church of God may split very gradually, not all at once. I suppose an analogy in biology might be cell division. When a single cell reproduces itself, it splits. But it does not split at once. The nucleus splits first. For a time, you have one cell with two nuclei. But eventually the whole cell splits. If that happens in UCG, first the government will split. You will have two governments in one Church organization. That will not last long before the whole Church splits.

That may not happen at all. It might be a possibility.

Whatever happens, it could get uglier and uglier.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Latest Church of God News

2010-12-09T18:48:00.007-06:00

Long-time evangelist Dibar Apartian has died. Mr. Apartian served the French-speaking and International areas under Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong and Mr. Roderick Meredith. I have never met him, but I have listened to many of his sermons, and my impression of him was that he was a kind and loving man. Here are links to sites with more detailed information:
COGwriter blog (Bob Thiel):
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/lcg-evangelist-dibar-apartian-died/
Also:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/dibar-apartian-in-memoriam/
Thoughts En Route blog (Wally Smith):
http://wallacegsmith.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/well-miss-you-mr-apartian/
Inside United: Realtime blog:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/a-faithful-servant/

UCG Current Crisis blog published an audio file of a question and answer session between the Council of Elders and students at ABC. It runs about 1 hour and 7 minutes, and various Council members took turns answering questions from the students about the current crisis in United Church of God.

Some highlights:

A student asked why members of the Council resigned from the Council. Mr. Melvin Rhodes answered that 2 of the resignation letters cited health reasons (of the 3 resignations turned in this week) and 2 of those resigning said they could not support the consensus of the Council. It was not clear if there was overlap between those who cited health reasons and those who could not support the Council.

In response to a question about whether there were more firings and resignations to come Mr. Robin Webber said the ministers have made an ethical bond with the UCG organization and that they are all duty bound to uphold the consensus of the General Conference of Elders (GCE) and the Council of Elders (COE), and that it is a bond and who and what you are. He said that the ministers are bound by the words "spiritual consensus". What struck me about this statement was that it was emphasizing loyalty to the organization and to a minister's commitment to that organization, but no mention is made of loyalty to obey God the Father and Jesus Christ. You can listen to the audio file and judge for yourself if loyalty to God and the Bible is being emphasized or not. This statement starts about 18 minutes into the session.

A student asked why so many men who have served faithfully are resigning or being asked to leave. Mr. Aaron Dean asked how well you can know anyone, and he said that people can change over time. Mr. Scott Ashley also responded to that question (about 35 minutes into the recording). He reiterated that when UCG was formed, the ministry chose a form of governance based on the proverb that in a multitude of counselors there is safety, that there is no one biblical form of governance, and that Christ did not leave one apostle in charge, but all twelve. He then compares the governance in UCG with the government of the United States, asking, who is the head of the country, who is the primary power? He answers, the president. Then he says that it is not like that in UCG, but that the primary authority and power within UCG is the sum total of all the ministers, about 470 or 480 men. He describes the president in UCG as being on the third tier down, under the authority of the Council, which is under the authority of the whole ministry (the General Conference of Elders). Then he states that the Council is the highest active authority within the Church. If that sounds confusing to you, it sounds confusing to me too, and contradictory. First he says that the entire ministry, the collective body of 470 or 480 ministers called the General Conference of Elders is the primary authority, then he says that the Council of Elders is the highest active authority in the Church.

So is the entire ministry in charge of the Council or is the Council in charge of the entire ministry? Who runs UCG, the General Conference of Elders (470-480 ministers) or the Council of Elders (now 10 men)? Who runs UCG?

Either way, no mention was made in Mr. Ashley's statement of Jesus Christ and how he fits into this upside-down hierarchy.

I would also point out that UCG governance is not based on safety in a multitude of counselors. Counselors give advice to decision makers. The decision makers can follow or not follow the advice. The balloting of the ministry is not advice on how to make a decision that a leader can accept or not. The balloting in UCG IS the decision. It is not advice or counsel. UCG governance gives the majority the power to force its will on the minority. That is NOT safety in a multitude of counsel. Also, it is incorrect or misleading to say that the Bible does not teach one form of governance. There are two basic forms of governance, top-down and bottom-up. In every system of government set up by God, authority flows from the top down, never from the bottom up. Details may vary, but that basic structure is always the same. And I believe the statement that Christ did not leave one apostle in charge is incorrect. The Bible shows that Peter was leader among the apostles. He led by seeking agreement, but he led.

A student pointed out that a UCG letter said that Latin American brethren were not cut off, then asked if they were still receiving money from UCG. Mr. Mario Seiglie replied that ministers are bound by the commitment they made when they signed on as UCGAI ministers, that they have credentials given to them because they said they would back this system of government and this group of governing authorities, then he asks if UCG is committed to continue to support those who have broken that pact.

One statement I found particularly interesting, because I suppose it could refer to one of my posts, but could also refer to posts in UCG Current Crisis blog, is a statement by Mr. Webber criticizing those who make "real long lists" about which ministers have resigned or done this or that. My reply is that it is my experience that in a time of internal crisis, members hunger for information and facts about what is going on. They want to know. They can make decisions, but they want to know the facts, and sometimes those facts are hard to come by. I have made a list in a previous post, "Where UCG Ministers Stand", of those ministers who have signed letters of concern or have resigned or been fired so readers can conveniently find out where their ministers stand in this crisis. (I also try to keep that list up-to-date with new information as it becomes available).

Here is a link to UCG Current Crisis post with the audio file of the question and answer session:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5555883-q-and-a-session-at-abc

In another item, the Shining Light blog has published an open letter of concern from 87 ministers to Mr. Dennis Luker. Here is a link to that post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1523
UCG Current Crisis blog also published the same letter with 110 signatures, explaining that the letter was originally signed by 57 ministers but later more ministers added their names thus endorsing the content. Link below:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5551307-an-open-letter-to-the-president-of-the-united-church-of-god

UCG has published three letters in rapid succession in its Inside United: Realtime blog explaining its efforts to achieve reconciliation. Here are links to the posts in order from first to last:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/only-one-ucgia-organization-in-latin-america/

http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/latin-american-ministry-reconciliation/

http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/efforts-to-seek-reconciliation/

In the second post listed above, which is titled, "Latin American Ministry Reconciliation", the letter states that the August meetings with Mr. Leon Walker to seek reconciliation were unproductive because Mr. Walker insisted that he be restored as director of the Latin American ministry. Actually, I would have thought that reinstatement of Mr. Walker would be a GOAL of reconciliation, not an impediment. I do not know why the Council cannot reinstate Mr. Walker to his former position. I realize that I am not in a position to know the facts, but the Council is choosing to discuss the details openly, and they have given reasons for Mr. Walker's removal that do not make sense. No one has accused Mr. Walker of teaching heresy or of breaking the Ten Commandments or engaging in immoral behavior. As I understand it, the accusations against him fall into two categories: he advised ministers in how to vote, and he refused to cancel a trip to attend a meeting. In the matter of advising ministers in how to vote, how can that be wrong since the Council and administration continue to say that UCG governance was based on the principle of a multitude of counsel? In the matter of not canceling a trip, Mr. Walker already met once with Council representatives and could have met again after the trip. Accusers of Mr. Walker like to say that even in a business corporation you would be fired for not obeying orders, but I doubt if many UCG Council or administration leaders have much experience in the corporate business world, so let me educate them. That is NOT how business works. Decisions of that kind take into consideration the value of the employee and his reasons for refusing to obey an order. High-lever executives are NOT automatically fired. In such a case, if an executive is fired, it is usually for other reasons.

I do not know why four members of the Council of Elders have resigned. They may not be at liberty to give all the reasons at this time, but those reasons will eventually come out. But Jim Franks was the first, and the others seem to have followed.

This is speculation. But as long as all four members remained on the Council, those ministers who could not support the majority's agenda were perhaps themselves divided on whether to stay in UCG and fight for reform, or leave. And as long as the four stayed on the Council, many had hope for the first option. Whether it was Mr. Franks' intention or not, that first option is probably closed. With the "majority" on the Council now becoming the "unanimity", there is no chance of a change in power now.

In other words, the resignation of Jim Franks from the Council, followed by the resignations of David Treybig, Michael Blackwell, and David Baker, sends a signal to all those ministers who do not support the agenda and direction of the Council - we are leaving.

If that is the case, there may be moves to investigate the Council, to bring facts to light, and to prepare, but in the end, those ministers who cannot accept the leadership of the Council and administration will have to leave. The split is basically complete, except for the paperwork.

What remains to be seen is, will ministers leave together or in small groups? If together, who will lead? What structure of governance will they have?

The last time this happened was in Worldwide, and the same ministers who are faced with having to leave an organization today were also faced with that situation 15 years ago. And at that time, they left together as a group. We will see if they do the same thing this time.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7

Changes in the Makeup of the UCG Council of Elders

2010-12-07T21:09:00.003-06:00

Events in United Church of God have entered a new phase. There are changes being reported in the membership of the 12-man Council of Elders even as the Council is conducting business meetings from Monday through Thursday this week.

In the last post, I have published a list of names of a number of UCG ministers who have signed documents out of concern about actions of the COE, and I will try to keep that list up-to-date with news about particular ministers. Since I published that post, a number of events in UCG have been reported, which I will list here in time order.

As reported in the Shining Light blog, Mr. Melvin Rhodes sent out a letter announcing that Paul Carter, Pablo Dimakis, Ken Giese, Eduardo Hernandez, and Jon Pinelli have resigned from the General Conference of Elders. The same letter announced the names of several Latin American ministers whose membership in the GCE was revoked. Here is a link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1434

The Shining Light blog also reported that Ron Kelley was dismissed from the ministry of UCG. Link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1443

Mr. Melvin Rhodes sent a letter to the UCG ministry stating that the petition for a resolution to the General Conference of Elders is legally flawed and contrary to UCG's governing documents and should be withdrawn. James Malm has published the text of the letter and his commentary. Link to text of letter alone in Shining Light blog:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1434
Link to text of letter with James Malm's commentary:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1443

UCG Current Crisis blog published an updated list of UCG ministers and employees who have been removed from their positions in the last year. Notable in this list is the recent resignation of four members of 12-man Council of Elders: David Treybig, Michael Blackwell, David Baker, and Jim Franks. Neil Hart resigned from UCG ministry. Link:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4214920-individuals-who-have-resigned-or-been-removed-from-their-positions-in-the-last-year

The Shining Light blog has also reported the resignation of Jim Franks from the COE, and in the same post publishes excerpts from a letter from David Treybig to his congregation. I think Mr. Treybig wrote this letter before resigning from the COE. James Malm also reports that the Council plans to approve a number of ministerial ordinations during the Monday through Thursday meetings, and James also points out that by declaring the petition to the GCE to be legally flawed and asking that it be withdrawn, the Council has set the stage for accusing its supporters and signers of rebellion and using that as a reason to fire them. Here is a link to that post:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1464

In another Shining Light post, James Malm reports on the Neil Hart resignation, and publishes a letter from Dave DeHart, Glenn Doig, Mike Machin, and Frank Pierce, sponsors of the Petition for Resolution to the GCE, to Mr. Rhodes indicating they will not withdraw the petition, and why. Link:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=1483

Both UCG Current Crisis blog and COGwriter blog report that Victor Kubik is now a member of the Council of Elders and that David Treybig, Michael Blackwell, and David Baker have resigned from the COE. Link to UCG Current Crisis post:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5537231-council-of-elders-update
Link to COGwriter post:
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-more-resignations-and-a-new-chairman/

John Carmack published a letter from Dr. Don Ward in his COG Perspective blog about why he feels an Acts 15 type conference may be successful. He is replying to a blogger who has criticized the idea in a Facebook blog. Here is the link:
http://blog.cogperspective.org/2010/12/message-by-dr-ward.html

UCG Current Crisis blog lists ten current members of the new Council of Elders as Scott Ashley, Bob Berendt, Aaron Dean, William Eddington, Roy Holladay, Victor Kubik, Darris McNeely, Melvin Rhodes (chairman), Mario Seiglie and Robin Webber. Here is a link to that post:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/5537231-council-of-elders-update

Inside United Realtime blog also announced the changes in the membership of the Council of Elders, announcing the resignation of the four members mentioned and explaining how Roy Holladay and Victor Kubik became members. There are now ten members of the Council, which the Council says is sufficient to do business, and they will function with those ten members. Here is a link to that post:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/12/07/dec-7-letter-from-the-council-and-president/

Those who are sometimes called "conservatives" have resigned from the 12-man ruling Council of Elders and been replaced by those who have been in agreement with the Council majority. This suggests that the conservative ministers may NOT be trying to regain control of UCG by reforming it from the inside, as I previously thought when the petition was circulated for an investigation into the actions of the Council and the administration. Rather, the investigation that the petition proposes may be for the purpose of helping the brethren understand why the split is occurring and why it is necessary for the conservatives to leave and form a new group (or several groups).

This has been a problem for ministers leaving UCG. When ministers left Worldwide when doctrinal changes were being made, it was easy for brethren to understand that ministers were leaving because they could not support the changes. But the core issues that are driving this UCG split have never come to the surface in a way that is clear and definite. The Sabbath issue hints at doctrinal liberalization, but there is no real smoking gun. Ministers leaving UCG want to be able to show their congregations a reason why they must leave. An investigation into the actions of the Council might show the brethren what the conservative ministers already know. If so, it would make it easier to explain to the membership of each pastor's congregation why he is leaving United Church of God. If the brethren do not understand, they will be less likely to follow their pastor out of UCG.

So this might not be a battle any longer for control of UCG. It may now be a battle for the membership. When UCG ministers leave UCG, how many brethren will go with them and how many will stay with UCG?

Also, the Council of Elders (I no longer have to call them the Council "majority" - the whole Council is on the same side now) has two tools to make sure they have the votes they need in the General Conference of Elders. By declaring the petition for an investigation legally flawed and calling for the withdrawal of that petition, they can accuse any minister sponsoring, supporting, or signing it of rebellion and use that as an excuse to remove him from the ministry, thus eliminating his vote against the Council members. But a second tool is that of ordination - the Council can approve a number of ordinations of men they know will support them, thus adding them to the votes that will go in their favor.

This means that a total split is coming soon, probably before Passover.

So far I have not found any letters published on the Internet from the resigning members of the Council of Elders explaining WHY they resigned from the Council of Elders, but I expect that such letters will come soon. When they do, they may shed more light on the entire division within UCG.

The pace of events has picked up.

More to come...

Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:

A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5

Government in the Church, Chapter 5

Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6

Church Government, Chapter 7

How Is the Church Organized?, Chapter 7