Feast of Tabernacles 2024 - Changing the Physical Environment

After Atonement comes the Feast of Tabernacles, a seven day festival to celebrate the kingdom of God and the millennial rule of Christ and the saints on the earth.  The first of the seven days is a holy day, a day of rest and assembly.  Traditionally, on the other days we assembly every morning for services, usually having double services on the weekly Sabbath as it comes during the Feast.

After Christ returns and the saints are resurrected to immortality, as represented by the Day of Trumpets (1 Corinthians 15:50-57, Revelation 11:15-19), and after Satan is put away as pictured by Atonement (Revelation 20:1-3), Christ and the saints will rule the earth for a thousand years (Revelation 20:4).  Our rule will bring happiness to mankind.  The Feast of Tabernacles represents the happiness of both the millennium and the kingdom of God for eternity.  To help us picture this, God gives us our second tithe to enjoy during the Feast, money we can spend for festival expenses, food, drink, entertainment, and recreation.

There are many scriptural passages that refer to the happiness and joy of that time.  Here is a list of some of them:    Amos 9:13-15, Ezekiel 39:25-29, Zechariah 8:23, Isaiah 9:6-7, Isaiah 11:1-16, Isaiah 12:1-6, Isaiah 2:2-4, Isaiah 25:6-8, Isaiah 35:5-10, Jeremiah 31:31-34, Psalm 98:4-9, Micah 4:1-4, Habakkuk 2:14, Isaiah 65:24-25, Psalm 22:27-31, Psalm 47:1-2, Psalm 97:1, Jeremiah 23:5-8.

After the millennium, there will be a general resurrection as pictured by the Last Great Day, a time when billions of people will be brought back to life.  This will be a massive number of people that will have to be clothed, housed, and fed.  Eventually, they will be able to provide for themselves from their labor, but to start off they will need help for a time.

It is during the millennium that the people on the earth will prepare to help those who come up in the general resurrection.  They will not just be growing food, building houses, and making clothing for themselves but also for those who will come up in the general resurrection.

This will be an opportunity for them to learn the give way of life by practicing it.  They can practice the way of loving their neighbors as themselves by sacrificing, laboring, and contributing to the massive work of preparing for the billions who will come up in a general resurrection.

During the millennium the environment will be changed.  Deserts will have water (Isaiah 35:1-2, 6-7, Isaiah 41:18-20, Isaiah 43:19-20, Isaiah 51:3).  The nature of animals will be changed (Isaiah 11:6-9, Isaiah 65:25).  Waste areas will flourish.  A great deal of work will be involved in changing the environment and ecology.  It is not just a matter of making aggressive animals tame.  If animals no longer kill animals for food, their diets will change.  They will have to eat plants.  That means other changes will be required in the digestive system, teeth, etc., as well as instincts.  Also, reproductive instincts and processes will have to change so that there is not overpopulation of species that are no longer eaten.  Foxes can be changed to not kill rabbits, but what happens to the rabbit population without predators to keep it in check?  Too many rabbits will destroy the plant cover, then the rabbits will starve.

And whatever changes are made to the plants and animals will have to be made to their DNA so the changes are passed on from generation to generation.  Everything will have to be planned in detail to produce a well-functioning, balanced, and stable ecology.

Changing the environment will be a big job.  Who will do it?

Christ has been given all power and authority over the universe (Matthew 28:18), and no doubt He will do it.  But we, the resurrected saints, will be His wife.  Christ will rule the earth, but we will help Him in ruling the earth - we will rule with Him.  Likewise, will we also assist Him in making the changes to the animals, bringing water to the deserts, and any other changes that need to be made to the earth?  I think that is a possibility to consider.

Mr. Armstrong has taught, I believe in Mystery of the Ages and The Incredible Human Potential, that he believed it was man's destiny to bring life to the planets of the universe.  So the resurrected saints will have to know about physical life and its complexity and how to work with DNA or other means to work with life in all its variety.  We will also need to know how to change the surface of a planet to make it hospitable for life, having the right temperature and atmosphere and bodies of water for example.

Perhaps working with the environment on earth for the millennium may be a starting point for us to begin to learn about these things.  Perhaps Christ will have us assist Him in making these changes just as we assist Him in ruling the earth.

This is something we can consider the next time we review the scriptures about the wolf dwelling with the lamb and the lion eating straw like the ox (Isaiah 11:6-9).  Perhaps this may be an interesting topic to talk about as we discuss God's truth in the spirit of iron sharpens iron.

"As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance of his friend" (Proverbs 27:17).

"Then those who feared the Lord spoke to one another, And the Lord listened and heard them; So a book of remembrance was written before Him For those who fear the Lord And who meditate on His name.  'They shall be Mine,' says the Lord of hosts, 'On the day that I make them My jewels.  And I will spare them As a man spares his own son who serves him' " (Malachi 3:16-17).

 

Atonement 2024 - Why Did Lucifer Sin?

Atonement is an annual holy day.  It is a day of rest, assembly, and fasting.  We go for 24 hours without food or drink from sunset to sunset.  It is commanded in Leviticus 23:26-32.  Its meaning is described in Leviticus 16:1-34 and Revelation 20:1-3.

It represents the putting away of Satan, but it also, like Passover, represents the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.  Both we and Satan share in our guilt for our sins.  He tempts us into sinning, so he shares in the responsibility for our sins, but we make the choice.  Christ paid the penalty for our share of the guilt (Leviticus 16:15-19), but Satan pays his own penalty for his share of the guilt (Leviticus 16:20-22).

Satan is the ruler of this evil society (Luke 4:5-7, John 14:30) and deceiver of mankind (Revelation 12:9).

After Christ returns and the saints are resurrected, pictured by the Day of Trumpets, Satan is bound and put away and not allowed to deceive or tempt mankind, pictured by Atonement.  This lasts through the millennium.  With Christ ruling the earth and Satan not around anymore, there will be peace and happiness for a thousand years all over the earth.

There are two passages in the Old Testament that describe Satan's history and nature, in Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:11-19.

Satan, originally named Lucifer, was not created evil.  He was perfect in his ways, for a time, until he sinned (Ezekiel 28:15).  This can raise the question, why did he sin?  Did he not know the consequences for himself?

Apparently not.  But he could have known.

Did not God warn him?  Did God not tell him if he turned to sin, to vanity and self-centeredness, that he would suffer the penalties of sin, his mind would be corrupted and he would be miserable forever?

It is evident in the Bible that it is part of God's loving nature to warn.  God's warnings fill the Bible from God's warning to Adam about the consequences of taking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:16-17) to warnings to anyone who adds to or takes from the book of Revelation (Revelation 22:18-19).  So God, who does not change (Malachi 3:6), must have warned Lucifer and all the angels about the consequences of sin.  God's motive was love.

So how could Lucifer not know?

To know what God reveals requires two things - God must teach us and we must believe God.  It takes both instruction and believing the instruction for us to learn.  Without belief, instruction does no good.

For Lucifer to believe God's warnings, he would have had to exercise faith to believe what God said.  Without faith in God's word, he couldn't know for sure.  Without faith, he couldn't know for sure if God was telling him the truth.

He had no experience with sin, either his own sin or anyone else's sin.  Apparently, Lucifer was the first being to sin.  Before that, there was no sin and no chance for Lucifer to learn by experience or observation.

He had not suffered.  As long as he was perfect in his ways, as long as he lived righteously, he knew nothing but happiness.  He didn't know what suffering was.  To understand and know God's warnings about the misery that would come upon him if he turned to vanity, he would have to believe what God told him.  He would have to take God's word that the warning was real.

That was his choice.

He could have believed God, believed God's warnings, and avoided sin.  But he didn't.

Instead, he turned to vanity, perhaps as an experiment.  Maybe he wanted to try vanity, to try the pleasures of sin, to see and observe how things turned out.  Would he be more or less happy?

If Lucifer was the first to sin, and apparently he was, there was no person or outside force to tempt him.  God did not tempt him and the angels did not tempt him.  He had not sinned, so there was no evil nature within him to make him sin.

It was a deliberate, thought-out choice by Lucifer.

He should have believed God.  He should have trusted his Maker.

Instead, he practiced the way of vanity.  Maybe this was the first scientific experiment.  Lucifer decided to try vanity, to try sin, to see if it made him happier.  So he ignored God's warnings.  He chose the "scientific method" in a sense rather than the word of God, just as he teaches mankind today.  Don't believe God, he thought.  Try things, observe the results, and draw your own conclusions.  Find out for yourself from experience.  Then follow your own reasoning.  Isn't this the way of life this world follows?

This is the way of Adam and Eve when they took the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:1-7).

There was a time when Solomon tried seeking pleasure to see the result (Ecclesiastes 2:1-16).  It did not produce a good result for Solomon either (Ecclesiastes 2:17-20, 1 Kings 11:1-40).

We should believe God, as Abraham did (Genesis 15:6, Romans 4:3, Galatians 3:6-9, James 2:23, Isaiah 51:1-3).  We should walk by faith and not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:7, Habakkuk 2:4).

After Lucifer sinned, the penalties God had warned him about took effect.  His mind became twisted.  His vanity corrupted his wisdom (Ezekiel 28:17).  His mind became filled with hate and resentment.  He became God's enemy, and God changed his name to what he had become - Satan.  He became a liar and the the father of lies (John 8:44).  He became a murderer (John 8:44).  His evil nature makes him miserable.

Can he go back?

No.  He would have to think clearly to do that, and he can't anymore.  He can no longer think right to even try to go back.  His mind is now perverted, and he cannot think rightly to straighten it out.  His choice has become permanent.  This is what God had warned him about, but he didn't believe God.

Perhaps this is why God places such an emphasis on faith.  He wants us to believe what He says.  He doesn't want another Lucifer in His kingdom.  He wants faith, the willingness to believe what He says, to be a permanent part of our character.

After Lucifer sinned and became Satan the devil, he set about persuading the angels under his authority to follow his example.  They did, most or all of them, apparently a third of all angels created (Revelation 12:3-4), and they suffered the same penalty.  Their minds became twisted and perverted.  They became demons, unclean spirits.

How did he do this?  Probably, it took time.  Mr. Armstrong has taught that Satan no doubt worked on individual angels one at a time at first, persuading each that God was unfair to them, arousing bitterness and resentment in them, and then it would spread to the others.  There could have been a long history of quarrels and conflicts among the angels on the earth as this played out over time.

After seeing what happened in Worldwide after Mr. Armstrong died, I can imagine another stage in the process that would precede and prepare the ground for building resentment and bitterness in the angels on earth over imagined injustices.

Satan first had to weaken the foundation of the way of life the angels had been living when they followed God's instruction.  What was that foundation for the right way of life?  Love.  Mr. Armstrong called it the "give way of life".  Having an outgoing concern for others.  That was the exact opposite of selfishness, self-centeredness, and vanity.  Satan had to weaken that foundation in the angels' way of life.

Maybe he did that a little at a time.

In Worldwide, the doctrinal changes that followed the death of Mr. Armstrong were sometimes justified by someone saying that Mr. Armstrong told his successor in private to make the changes.

Satan could have done something similar with the angels regarding the give vs. the get way of life.  He could have started with a slight change in doctrine.

I have no doubt that God taught all the angels directly the give way of life and that Lucifer's job was to continue to teach this way of life to the angels, just as in the Church of God Mr. Armstrong set doctrine and had the ministry teach it to the brethren.

But Lucifer, now become Satan the enemy of God, could have started to subvert the teaching of the give way of life little by little in his teaching and supervising and ruling the angels on the earth who were under his authority.

He could have continued teaching the give way of life, but not 100%.  He could have introduced compromise here and there.  He could teach maybe 1% the get way of life and 99% the give way of life.  And when questioned by the angels under him, "Didn't God teach us that we should live 100% the give way of life at all times?", Satan could have replied something like this.  "You are right, we should all mostly live the give way of life, the way of love, as God taught us.  But that doesn't mean all the time.  God talked to me personally about this and told me to teach you that a little bit of the get way of life, a little bit of selfishness and looking out for ourselves, can be a good thing - it leads to a more balanced, less extreme life.  The main thing is to live the give way of life most of the time, but not always.  Yes, God told us to live the give way of life 100% all the time, but He said this for emphasis.  He did not intend you to do this literally all the time.  A little bit of 'sin' can be a good thing, if done in balance."  

This could undermine God in the eyes of the angels under Satan in two ways.  It would introduce sin into their way of life, even only a little bit, and this would begin to produce a penalty, a loss of wisdom and perversion of mind, the same perversion of mind Lucifer went through went he first sinned.  But it would also slander God, accusing Him in a subtle way of lying to the angels when He told them to live 100% the way of love, the give way of life.  Though Satan could seem to be supporting God, his hidden message would be, you can't always trust what God says.

Then, little by little, Satan could teach the angels more and more of the selfish, vain, self-centered get way of life.  They would be weakened more and more.  Their minds would become corrupted as they became more and more vain and selfish.

Then, they would be ripe for Satan to begin building resentment and bitterness over imagined unfair treatment, one angel at a time, then watching it spread till all the angels were totally corrupted.

Of course this is speculation.  The Bible doesn't give this kind of detail.  But I think most people who were in the Church during the period that changes were being made after 1986 can remember and imagine how this is possible.  This is something like how changes were justified.  So it is possible.

The lesson for us is, don't compromise with God's word.  Obey Him 100%, always.  Sometimes one scriptural passage can help explain and balance another scriptural passage, but our doctrines and our lives have to be based on God's word.  Live the give way of life.  Serve the brethren.  Put sin out of our lives.  Do God's work.  Trust and believe God.  Study the Bible and live by every word of God.  Put zeal into it.

" '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 He answered and said, 'It is written, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God" ' " (Matthew 4:4).

If we do these things, we will succeed in God's purpose for us.  We will effectively do His work and we will be in His kingdom.

Trumpets 2024 - We Don't Know When Our Master Comes

The fall holy days are about to begin, beginning with the Day of Trumpets.  Trumpets is an annual holy day and feast day.  We are to observe it as a day of rest and assembly, like the weekly Sabbath, but meals can be prepared.  Trumpets is commanded in Leviticus 23:24-25, but its meaning is made clear in the New Testament (Revelation 8:1-13, 9:1-21, 11:15-19, 19:11-21, 1 Corinthians 15:50-57).

The sound of a trumpet can represent war (Joshua 6:1-5, 15-21, Ezekiel 33:1-6).  In Revelation, there are seven soundings of a trumpet described.  At the last trumpet, Christ returns and the saints are resurrected.  Those of us alive at the time, if we are being led by God's Holy Spirit, are changed from mortal to immortal, and we rise to meet Christ in the air along with the resurrected saints.  

Christ warns us to not be complacent about our salvation thinking, "my Lord delays His coming", thinking we have a long time yet (Matthew 24:42-51).  We don't know the day Christ comes.  He can come to us at any time.  That may or may not apply to Christ's literal coming to this earth, but in a figurative sense that day can come to us personally at any time because we don't know the day of our death.  When we die, Christ comes in the next second of our consciousness, so for us, it is now, even if Christ does not literally come to this earth for many years yet.

So Trumpets reminds us of our reward, but is also a warning that we should always be ready.

Does Mystery of the Ages Say Too Much?

As we approach the 40th anniversary of the death of Herbert W. Armstrong, I often think about why the Church of God and all of its scattered fellowships, since the death of Mr. Armstrong and the apostasy, have never had the kind of success that Mr. Armstrong had in preaching the gospel to the world and giving a warning about the great tribulation to come upon our peoples if we don't repent.

As the years go by and I get older, my memory fades, but as I recall we had a Plain Truth circulation of over seven million and one of the largest religious broadcasts on TV near the end of Mr. Armstrong's life.  Although we never reached everyone in the nations that have come from the scattered tribes of Israel, or even a majority, we were well on our way.  The work was growing rapidly.

Today, none of the COG fellowships, not even the best of them, comes anywhere close, and our national populations are larger than they were in Mr. Armstrong's day.  Most or many of the people that heard Mr. Armstrong's messages are gone and a new generation has replaced them.  Most people alive today in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, etc. have never heard our message of the true gospel and the warning of God's punishment to come if they don't repent.  Most people alive today were not born or were in childhood when the work was cut short by the apostasy.

Yet the need for the gospel and the warning, especially I think the warning, is greater now than it has ever been.

A warning is needed.  When people go through the tribulation, they need to be able to remember that God was fair to warn them first, especially those who do not know that the things they practice, like pagan holidays and using images in worship, are wrong.  And the Bible makes clear that it is God's way to warn before punishing.  He does this in love and wisdom, to give the wicked time to repent, and He commands us to deliver His warning to the people (Proverbs 24:11-12, Ezekiel 3:17-21, Ezekiel 33:1-9, Isaiah 58:1).

But we are not doing it.  We try, but so far no one has succeeded, except on a very small scale, totally inadequate for the requirements of the task.

Why?

I wonder about that.

Part of it, no doubt, is because the Church as a whole is Laodicean, not Philadelphian, and the open door is only for Philadelphians (Revelation 3:7-13).  Yet, there must be some Philadelphians even if they are scattered.  Why is not a wide-open door open to a small group of them?

I have said many times before that the Church needs to teach its members to believe the Bible more than the Church because believing the Bible more than their churches is what we ask the public to do.  I still believe that is important.  Until we do that, we will not succeed.

But something else, something in addition to the above, has recently occurred to me.  I am researching this, and what follows must be considered speculative.  I invite readers who are on fire for the gospel and the warning to also research this.  I have an open mind.  I could be wrong, but I am trying to research it, and I may publish what I learn in a few months.

I invite discussion and ideas on this.  I am not at all sure that I am right, and I am looking for answers.

The title of this post asks the question, does Mystery of the Ages say too much?  But I don't just mean only that one book.  I use it to represent the whole body of truth and doctrine that Mr. Armstrong and the Church of God has taught.

Perhaps some things should be taught to the whole general public on the Internet, in the magazine, in books and booklets offered to everyone which they can receive just by sending in a request card, yet other things only taught to the Church and to those who begin to respond with tithes, offerings, one-time donations, requests for visits, questions or comments sent in by mail, email, or telephone call, etc.  Perhaps some subjects should only be taught in literature or DVDs offered to those who start to respond with more than a routine request or renewal of a magazine subscription or routine response to a radio or TV broadcast - something that shows more than routine interest.

Our example is Jesus Christ.  When we are perfectly trained, we will be like Him (Luke 6:40).  How did He preach the gospel?

When Mr. Armstrong discovered the truth, even as he discovered more new knowledge as God revealed it to him through the Bible, he shared the vast majority of it with the public on radio and TV, in the magazines, and in books and booklets offered in the magazines or on radio or TV.  He followed the example of how Paul taught his congregations, declaring the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:26-27).

Yet, most people are not called.  "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:44).  Most people are deceived by Satan, for Satan deceives the whole world (Revelation 12:9).

Mr. Armstrong certainly knew this, and it was one of his major teachings.

But he proclaimed the truth to the public, even knowing most would not "get it".  He trusted that God would allow those who are not called to be blinded and those who are being called to be able to understand and believe.  And so it has been.  Most people have not responded to our message, but some have, and some of those have come into the Church.

But is that what Christ did?  This is important because He is our example (Matthew 10:24-25, John 13:15-16, 1 Peter 2:21).

Did Jesus teach everything to the crowds, trusting that God the Father would move and work with and inspire those God was calling to Christ to understand and letting the rest be blinded by Satan?

No, not exactly.  There is certainly an element of that, but Christ did more.

Jesus knew what the Father was doing, and He actively participated to help the process.  He deliberately hid from the crowds those things that the Father did not want the crowds to know and understand.  He did this with parables.  He did not just teach the crowds everything clearly in plain language so they could understand the "plain truth", leaving it to the Father to let them be blinded by Satan.  Jesus said He only said what the Father commanded Him to say (John 8:28, John 12:49-50), and that includes consideration of who He was speaking to.  

He didn't tell everyone everything.

Ask anyone in the Church, why did Jesus speak in parables?  The answer you are likely to receive is, to hide the meaning.  That is something we clearly know, and that is right (Matthew 13:10-17).

But that does not mean that hiding the meaning was the purpose of every parable.  It depends on the parable and the audience.  In some cases, parables actually did make the meaning clear.

Did Jesus sometimes speak in a parable to make His meaning clear (as the world thinks He did)?  Yes.  Here are a couple of examples.

One asked Him about how to have eternal life and about the commandments (Luke 10:25).  Jesus answered him affirming that He should love his neighbor.  The man then asked Him, who is my neighbor?  Jesus then gave the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:26-35).

Did the man understand the parable?  Did Christ give it to make the meaning of loving one's neighbor clear?

The answer comes when Christ asked the man, which one in the parable was neighbor to the man who fell among thieves?  The man answered, the one who showed mercy on him.  Was that correct?  Yes.  Jesus said, go and do likewise (Luke 10:36-37).  

It is obvious that this parable was given to make the meaning clear, and it succeeded - the man understood.

Another example is when Jesus told the Pharisees the parable of the vineyard and its owner.  They became offended because they understood the parable, that it was against them (Mark 12:1-12, Luke 20:9-19).  This parable was not given to hide the meaning from the Pharisees but to make it clear, at least to some extent.  They probably didn't understand it fully in its depth, but they understood it enough to know it applied to them, and they were offended.  Yet Christ gave it to warn them.

You can do a Bible study on the parables of Christ and look for a pattern on what kinds of parables - what subject matters in other words - were given to hide the meaning and what were given to make the meaning clear.

What I think I have found so far (I am still researching this), and what you may find in your own research, is that Jesus made things clear regarding right and wrong - how people should obey God's law and commandments - but he hid the meaning when it came to the secrets of the kingdom of God.  

He taught the crowds what they needed to do to repent.  He taught them the coming kingdom of God.  But He did not teach them the secrets of God's plan and how He is working things out - the secrets of the kingdom of God.  He hid those things by teaching in parables that the crowds could not understand.

But to His disciples, not just the twelve but I think all His disciples - those who responded to His message and wanted to follow Him (many became the 120 on Pentecost, see Acts 1:15), He explained everything, explaining the parables and making the meaning clear (Mark 4:33-34).

He taught right and wrong, the need to repent, and the good news of the coming kingdom of God to the crowds, but to His disciples He explained everything including the secrets of the kingdom of God - apparently the details of God's plan.

Maybe that is what we should do.

Mr. Armstrong thought that, because the end of this age was near, it was God's time to reveal everything to those willing to listen.  

But the end of the age was not so near in Mr. Armstrong's time as he thought.

Mr. Armstrong thought what He was doing was preparing the world with a warning and the good news.  But God knew better.  What Mr. Armstrong was really doing, from God's point of view, was building the Church only, but Mr. Armstrong did not know that.

But the time for warning the world has come to us today.  Probably most of the people we preach to from now on will live into the great tribulation.

I suggest that one reason God has not yet given us the open door is that we explain too many things to the general public before they begin to respond.  It is not God's will that everybody knows every secret of His plan at this time.  After they begin to respond, it is different.  We can offer them everything.  But not initially.

"Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces" (Matthew 7:6).

To do this requires a change in literature and broadcasts.  We have to do Bible studies, research, etc. on the criteria for evaluating doctrines - what kinds of things should we teach to everyone and what should we teach only to those who begin to respond.  

For example, we have to teach the good news that Christ will return to rule the earth and bring happiness and justice - that is part of the gospel.  We have to preach salvation through Christ - that is also the gospel.  We have to deliver a warning message - God commands that in Ezekiel and elsewhere (Proverbs 24:11-12, Ezekiel 3:17-21, Ezekiel 33:1-9).  We have to cry aloud and tell people their sins (Isaiah 58:1).

But maybe we shouldn't teach the white throne judgment, that people are not being judged for what they do now until a general resurrection ("you can do anything you want now and still be saved later").  Maybe we shouldn't teach everyone that God is only calling a few now.  Maybe we shouldn't teach everyone every secret of God's plan until they show some response to the first body of doctrine.

It's not a matter of what we teach but the order in which we teach things and to whom we teach them.

Once we build a list of criteria from the Bible we can apply that list to a list of every doctrine we believe and teach and determine what should be taught to everyone in the general public and what should only be taught to the Church and those who begin to respond to our message.

We then prepare two bodies of literature, TV messages, and videos.  One will contain necessary knowledge for the public, and the other more complete teaching will be offered to everyone who shows more than routine interest.  The first body of teaching will be offered freely to everyone in the public, the second body of teaching to those from the public who begin to respond in some meaningful way.

Is this really God's will for those to go through an open door?  Or am I crazy?

I may be wrong.  And if I am wrong, I am willing to admit it.  But right now, I just don't know one way or the other.  This idea seems somewhat radical even to me, yet the scriptures I found seem to back it.  I hesitate to even publish this post, but the Bible support is too great to ignore this possibility.  So I want to bring it to the attention of others who can also explore it.  I want to open discussion on this.  In a multitude of counselors there is safety (Proverbs 11:14, Proverbs 24:6).

I want to get the opinion of others.  I offer this to my readers in a spirit of "iron sharpens iron".  Let's talk about this.

There is a way to test this.

Someone, some fellowship, should try it.  Do the research, prepare lists of doctrines for the two kinds of literature, publish something just for the first body of doctrine for the public leaving out the secrets of God's plan, and see if God blesses the effort.

Then we will be following the example of Christ who hid the secrets of the kingdom from the crowds.

Mystery of the Ages has been an excellent vehicle for teaching the Church of God, but not so successful in preaching the gospel to the world.  Maybe it says too much for that second purpose.  God did not give it wide distribution in the world.

But to test this idea requires that any fellowship that does this be qualified for the open door in other ways also.  You cannot expect God under any circumstances to bless a fellowship with an open door if that fellowship does not practice a Philadelphia-level of faithfulness.  A fellowship that tries this must be Philadelphian in character right straight down the line.

Specifically, I think to receive a wide-open door for preaching the gospel and the Ezekiel warning as Mr. Armstrong had, a fellowship must be led through hierarchical governance from the top down with one leader reporting to Christ - not elected by the voting or balloting of men.  It must have a leader and ministers and members who are striving with all their being to obey God's commandments and put sin out of their lives.  They must have zeal for the gospel and the warning message - on fire for the work.  And they must teach their members to believe the Bible more than COG leaders, ministers, traditions, and their own opinions.  Along with that point, to maintain unity, members must be taught not to contradict the ministry in conversation with other members.  You can't have members believing their churches contrary to what they see with their own eyes in God's word, but neither can you have members promoting their own pet theories with the membership.  We must not make idols out of our leaders, ministers, and traditions.  We must let God correct us and teach us new things from His word, even while we respect the authority God has given the ministry.

I don't even know if there is any COG fellowship today that does all these things.  No wonder we are failing.

But if there is such a fellowship, or if such a group arises in the future, if some leaders step out on these principles to revive the work of God and others gather to them, then what I have described in this post is something they can try.  God will make it known if He blesses it or not.

All the literature we have produced is still useful for the Church membership and for all who show more than routine interest.  But a new group of literature can be developed that only teaches the things God wants the world to know at this time even before they begin to respond.

If a fellowship is new, it can try offering the total package to the whole public first, as Mr. Armstrong did, and see if that works.  Then, they can try to offer only that part the public should know without the secrets of the kingdom of God, reserving that for those who respond.  See which approach God blesses more.

To the future.
 

Satan Accuses, God Warns

Is there a difference between an accusation and a warning?  A warning may include an accusation when given to someone who is sinning.  But there are a couple of differences between God's warnings and Satan's accusations.

We are approaching Atonement.  One of the things Atonement represents is the putting away of Satan.  We are coming to the season when we can expect to hear and read messages about Satan and his wrong way of life.  We can expect to be reminded that Satan is the accuser of the brethren, and we need those messages.  We should not fall into the way of Satan of having an accusing attitude towards our brethren.  

But God gives warnings, and sometimes those warnings contain accusations.  Not only does God warn but He commands us to deliver warnings to those who need them (Proverbs 24:11-12, Ezekiel 3:17-21, Ezekiel 33:1-9, 1 Corinthians 4:14, Colossians 1:28, 1 Thessalonians 5:14).

How do we warn in a right way without becoming an accuser like Satan?

Let's look at a couple of examples of Satan's accusations in the Bible.

The first is in Genesis in the account of the forbidden fruit.  You all know the story.  When Eve told Satan that God had forbidden Adam and Eve from eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Satan accused God of two things: lying ("you shall not surely die") and having a bad motivation ("God knows that in the day you eat of it ... you will be like God ..." (Genesis 3:1-5).

The second example is in the book of Job.  Satan accuses Job of only obeying God for selfish advantage (Job 1:8-11, Job 2:3-5).

In both cases, Satan is accusing for the purpose of condemning or embarrassing or harming the person he accuses, and in both cases Satan communicates, not with the person he is accusing, but with someone else.  He wants to hurt someone's reputation in the eyes of someone else.  He is not confronting the person he accuses directly.

Satan is not accusing to persuade someone to repent for their own good.  In the case of Job, Satan did not confront Job face-to-face and say, "Job you are only obeying God for selfish advantage. You need to repent and draw closer to God in humility, not self-righteousness."  No, Satan talked to God about Job behind Job's back, so to speak.  He had no intention of trying to help Job.  He was trying to belittle Job in God's eyes, or he was trying to defend his own selfish way of life to God, saying, look, even Job is selfish and self-centered.

But when God warns, He speaks to the wicked directly, and he gives the warning to help them repent (2 Peter 3:9).  That warning may include an accusation of wrong doing, but it is delivered to the person who needs it, and the warning is motivated by love.

Jesus Himself accused the Pharisees, but those accusations were part of warnings that were given in love (Matthew 15:7-9, Matthew 23:13-39, Mark 7:5-13, Luke 11:39-52).  Some of those accusations were pretty strong and harsh, but the motive was still love.  Christ delivered warnings containing accusations in some of the messages to the seven churches in Revelation (Revelation chapters 2 and 3).  Regarding the Pharisees, some of Christ's accusations were in the presence of the disciples, not the Pharisees, but those were warnings to the disciples not to follow the Pharisees, and the motive was still love, in this case, love for the disciples (Matthew 16:6-12, Mark 16:15-21, Mark 12:38-40, Luke 12:1-2, Luke 20:46-47).

That is the difference.  It is not wrong to accuse someone if it is part of a warning given to the one or ones who need the warning for their own long-term good.  That is motivated by love, and it is what God does.  But we should not accuse people behind their backs in an effort to hurt the ones we are accusing.

And it is certainly not wrong to discuss patterns of wrong doing without accusing any individual.  For example, it is not wrong to discuss the pattern of neglecting God in prayer, Bible study, and fasting in an effort to encourage people to draw close to God, talking about the harm of neglecting these things and the benefits of doing them.

We have to warn the world.  It is really God who warns the world, we just deliver His warning like a mail carrier delivers the mail.  In some cases, we may give warnings to the brethren when needed.

But always our motive should be love.  We should do it to help others in the long term.  

Can You Be Red-hot Zealous for God and Still Be Denied the Place of Safety?

Can you be red-hot on fire for God, very zealous for Him, not lukewarm at all, and still not be able to go to the place of safety, still have to go through the tribulation?

Many members of the whole Church of God think, no.  It is only the lukewarm Laodiceans who have to go through the tribulation.  If you are zealous for God and are not a Laodicean, you must be a Philadelphian and are promised protection during the tribulation - you can go to the place of safety.  So if you want protection, don't be lukewarm.  Don't be Laodicean.  Be on fire for God.  Be zealous.

Are they right?  Is being zealous for God the way to escape the tribulation and be counted worthy to go to a place of safety?

Being zealous is part of it, I think.  But the real test is something else.

Before getting into that, I would like to ask you, the reader, to stop and do an exercise.  I will use the results of this exercise later in this post.

Take a pen or pencil and piece of paper and make a short list of the Church of God fellowships you are familiar with, at least the major ones.  Include the fellowship you tithe to and attend with.  You might include United Church of God (UCG), Living Church of God (LCG), Church of God Assembly (CGA), and several others groups, small or large, that you have some familiarity with.

Next to each fellowship, write a number from 1 to 10 of how effective they are in preaching the gospel and the warning message about the tribulation to come to all the nations that come from the tribes of Israel.  This will be your personal rating, and it will be an estimate.  You probably can't know all the facts, but estimate the best you can based on what you know or have read or heard.  Take into consideration things like literature distributed, magazine circulation, radio or TV programs or advertisements, public meetings, number of people baptized that came into the fellowship through the work (not counting children of existing members), etc.

Now set it aside and keep reading.  We will use it later.

Back to the question, is being on fire for God, not lukewarm, the key to having God's protection in a place of safety during the tribulation?

That may be part of it.  But zeal alone is not key.  Remember, Paul, when he was Saul persecuting the Church, was zealous for God, but not according to knowledge.  He had zeal all right.  But not in the right direction, though he was sure it was.  He was like other Jews who persecuted Christians.  Paul had persecuted the Church of God, even when he had zeal for God.

"For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge (Romans 10:2).

"For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God" (1 Corinthians 15:9).

"For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it. And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers" (Galatians 1:13-14).  Note that Saul was zealous for the traditions he grew up with.

"As for Saul, he made havoc of the church, entering every house, and dragging off men and women, committing them to prison" (Acts 8:3).

"I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, taught according to the strictness of our fathers’ law, and was zealous toward God as you all are today. I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women, as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished" (Acts 22:3-5).

Let's look next at Christ's message to Laodicea.  Here is the whole message.  "And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, 'These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God: "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. Because you say, 'I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing' - and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked - I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches" ' " (Revelation 3:14-22).

There is much here, but let's focus on the need to be zealous.  Christ says one of Laodicea's problems is, they are lukewarm, and He tells them to be zealous and repent.

Now, many reason, if I can be zealous and not lukewarm, I am not a Laodicean.

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

To Philadelphia, Christ says that He will keep them from the hour of trial that will come on all the earth.  This means the place of safety and protection during the tribulation.

So some will reason, if I am zealous, I am not lukewarm.  And if I am not lukewarm, I am not Laodicean.  So if I am not lukewarm, I am Philadelphian and I am promised the place of safety.

But there is a false assumption hidden in the above reasoning that nullifies the whole line of reasoning.  That assumption is that, if you are not Laodicean, you are Philadelphian.  In other words, people who reason that if they are zealous and not lukewarm they will go to a place of safety may be making the assumption that there are only two possibilities - they are Laodicean or they are Philadelphian.  But that is not what the Bible says and that is not what Mr. Armstrong taught.

There are seven messages to seven churches, not just two.  We are in the Laodicean era, but that does not mean that every individual in that era is Laodicean, otherwise none of us could be Philadelphian.  This is the Laodicean era because that spiritual condition is dominant, not universal, otherwise no one could be Philadelphian.  But we know there must be some Philadelphians in the Laodicean era, if only a few, so they can go through an open door to finish the work and then go to a place of safety.

Laodicea is the last era of the Church, so it goes right up to the time we flee.  So there must be Philadelphians in the Laodicea era to flee.

But if there can be Philadelphians in an era dominated by the Laodicean condition, then likewise there can be members in any of the other five conditions described in the messages to the other five churches.

As I recall, this is what Mr. Armstrong taught.  And this is what the Bible teaches, for every messages ends with Christ's instruction to those who have an ear to hear to hear what the Spirit says to the churches, plural, implying all of them.

So you figure you are not Laodicean because you are hot for the truths Mr. Armstrong taught - you are red-hot on fire, very zealous.  But does that mean you are Philadelphian?

There are five other spiritual conditions described.  Are you one of those?

Are you in the spiritual condition of Ephesus?  Have you lost your first love?

Are you in the spiritual condition of Smyrna?  Christ has nothing bad to say about Smyrna (but they are not promised protection).

How about Pergamos?  How about Thyatira?  How about Sardis?

Just because one is not Laodicean does not make that member a Philadelphian.

And only Philadelphians are promised protection.

And if you are very zealous, don't be so sure you are not Laodicean.  Lukewarmness is not their only characteristic.  Also, one can be zealous for some things and lukewarm about other things and not realize it.  Remember, Laodiceans are blind as well as lukewarm - perhaps so blinded by their zeal for certain things that they cannot see that they are lukewarm about other things.

For example, a man can be so blinded by his zeal for the detailed teachings of Mr. Armstrong in Mystery of the Ages and other books and articles he wrote that he can't see that he is lukewarm about the overall pattern of Mr. Armstrong's way of life, who said, don't believe me, believe your Bible.

Mr. Armstrong always lived a way of life of believing the Bible more than Church tradition or the teaching of men, even men in the Church of God, and even his own teachings and writings.  And it is that way of life that produced the doctrinal truths he taught the Church of God.  And he practiced this way of life long before he thought of himself as an apostle and before he was even ordained as a minister.

It is not enough to be zealous.  You have to be zealous for the right thing.  Your zeal has to be pointed in the right direction.  Paul is a perfect example of zeal in the wrong direction before he was converted.  But at the time, he was too blind to see it.

Our zeal should be pointed towards the Bible and living by every word of God, not towards Mr. Armstrong and his writings or Church of God tradition or Church of God authority.  God and the Bible must come first, the Church and its leadership and ministry second.

Like Peter, we must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29).

There may be a way to know if God counts a member or a fellowship as Philadelphian.  A litmus test you can call it.

Look for the open door for doing God's work.  Look for the open door for preaching the gospel and the warning message to the nations.  Is it there?   

Why is the open door a test, a sign or indicator?  Because the open door is only promised to Philadelphia. It is not promised to any of the other six spiritual conditions described.

In other words, the only message that promises a place of safety also promises an open door for doing the work.  They go together.  And the open door comes first.

So do you have an open door for doing the work?  Are you going through that open door?  Do you have an open door that is more than just a tiny token effort to preach the gospel that does not really bear good fruit and get good results?

If you do not have such a door, why think about a place of safety?  Why think that the place of safety is for you?  The place of safety is only promised to those with the open door.

Now go back to the exercise you did with the list of Church of God fellowships.  You rated each according to how they are doing with preaching the gospel and the warning message.

Probably, you attend with and pay tithes to one of those fellowships.  How is it doing with preaching the gospel compared to the others?

Perhaps none of the fellowships you listed rates very high, especially compared to the work done in the days of Mr. Armstrong.  That may simply mean that there is no fellowship that has a majority of its members in the Philadelphian condition.  Philadelphians may be a small minority in every fellowship you listed.  Still, some fellowships do more of a work than others.  Are you supporting a group that has an open door?

If not, how are you a Philadelphian more than others?  If you are a Philadelphian, why would you not want your tithe money to go to where it will get the gospel out to more people?

If you don't care about that, forget the place of safety.  It isn't for you.  Start thinking about how you will draw close to God and have the spiritual strength to endure the tortures of the great tribulation, because, if you remain lukewarm about the work, that is likely what will happen to you if you live to that time.

And remember, God does not bless hypocrisy.  The only way to preach the gospel and the warning is to tell people to believe the Bible more than their churches and ministry, and if we tell that to the public we better be doing the same.

Mr. Armstrong taught us.  He has been our teacher and is still our teacher today.  But we better follow the good example he set by believing the Bible more than the Church, and we better hold fast to that way of life he practiced.  Christ said, one is perfectly trained when he is like his teacher (Luke 6:40).

Let us hold fast to the positive example of Mr. Armstrong and the way of life he lived which produced so much good fruit.  Let us believe God more than man, as he did.

Does God Call Every COG Leader to Discover New Knowledge on His Own?

Suppose a Church of God leader or pastor of a fellowship says, God did not call me to come up with new doctrinal ideas, and I am not smarter than Mr. Armstrong.  Is that wrong?

No, that is not necessarily wrong.  God does not open the mind of every COG leader to discover and learn new knowledge from the Bible as God did with Mr. Armstrong.  Likewise, God does not open the mind of every local minister, elder, or lay member to discover and learn new knowledge from the Bible apart from established Church teaching.

But it can happen, as it did with Mr. Armstrong.  God opened his mind to discover new knowledge from the Bible and from history in the matter of the identity of the lost tribes of Israel and the need to observe the annual holy days, but God did not open the minds of the leadership and ministry of Church of God Seventh Day on their own (Mr. Armstrong was attending with that Church fellowship as a lay member when he discovered these truths).  But Mr. Armstrong offered the knowledge of those things to Church of God Seventh Day leadership, and it could have been accepted, but was not.

In other words, God revealed to Mr. Armstrong, apart from the Church of God he was attending, new knowledge from the Bible, and then God used Mr. Armstrong to show it to the leadership of the Church, but the Church did not accept it.

Likewise, today, a lay member or local elder may discover new knowledge in the Bible, write up a study paper on it, and submit the study paper to the leadership of the Church.  God could be using that member to reveal new truth, always from the Bible, to the leadership.  And the leadership can accept it and teach it to the whole Church.  But God doesn't force him.  The leadership can choose to reject it even if it is true.

Why would God do such a thing as to reveal new knowledge to a lay member or local minister before revealing it to the top leadership?  I suppose there can be many reasons, but one reason comes to mind - to test both the leadership and the one submitting the study paper.

The one who has discovered new knowledge and submits a study paper on it is being tested to see if he respects and submits to government and authority in the Church by not promoting his idea among members, but peacefully and respectfully only submitting it to the leadership without causing division and not discussing it with others.  He is also being tested to see if he will believe God more than man, if he is willing to live by every word of God, and if he is willing to be truthful in what he says.  This last point is important for speakers who may be pressured to teach things they do not agree with, things they find disproved in the Bible.

The leadership is being tested to see if he has the humility to be corrected and to learn from a subordinate and is really willing to live by every word of God.

But if God has not opened the mind of the leadership to discover new knowledge on his own, will he be able to see it when someone submits it to him?

It is possible.

Loma Armstrong did not discover the truth of the Sabbath on her own, but when a Church of God member pointed it out to her from the Bible, she saw and accepted it immediately.

When Loma showed it to her husband, he had a real struggle with it - it was an emotionally painful test for him - but after long study he passed the test and accepted it.

Sometimes we have to help each other.  God made it that way.  That is why God says, in a multitude of counselors there is safety (Proverbs 11:14, Proverbs 24:6), and, iron sharpens iron (Proverbs 27:17).  But it takes love and humility for it to work the way God intended.

A top leader of a Church of God fellowship may not be able to discover new knowledge in the Bible on his own.  But he can examine a doctrinal premise and prove it from the Bible.  How can I know this?

Because he says he has done it and teaches the membership to do it - to prove truth from the Bible.

This may be in the context of Church of God teaching - our traditions which may be referred to as sound doctrine.  The leader claims to have proven the truths taught by Mr. Armstrong and he tells other members to do the same - prove the truth from the Bible.  How many times have we heard that?

So a leader must know how to take a doctrine - any doctrine - and prove from the Bible whether or not it is true.  He claims to have done this with Mr. Armstrong's doctrines and he teaches the members to do the same.

But if he can prove if Mr. Armstrong's doctrines are correct, he can do the same with any study paper submitted by a member.

It is the same process.  You prove the truth of any matter by getting all the facts, all the scriptures on the matter, putting them together, and letting the Bible interpret the Bible.  You prove the truth by believing what God says more than any man or tradition and more than your own opinion.  Mr. Armstrong did this.  It was hard for him, but he passed the test, and after that, God could use him.

This is what any leader should do when a member submits a doctrinal idea.

Of course, I understand that Church of God leaders have a heavy workload and may not have time to look at every paper, especially about minor matters.  But time permitting, the willingness should be there.

Speakers are taught to stick to "sound doctrine" when they speak, meaning doctrine that is consistant with the official teachings of the fellowship they are in.  This is correct.  New knowledge should not be introduced to a fellowship in a sermon, split-sermon, or sermonette without approval of the leadership.  That would cause division.  Let the leadership decide.  If he does not accept the new doctrine, keep quiet about it.  Speak on another subject.  Wait for Christ.  But continue to believe the truth as you can prove it in the Bible.  That is God's way.

Believing new knowledge we find in the Bible, even speaking to a pastor in private or sending in a study paper, does NOT cause division if we do it quietly without discussing or promoting it with the brethren.