Calling Evil Good and Good Evil

One of the sins God rebukes the people of Judah for is the sin of calling evil good and good evil.  "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" (Isaiah 5:20).

We can see this in the world all the time.  Sexual perversion is called good. Teaching about the Bible is called evil and is called hate speech.  Abortion is called, "health care".  Right child discipline is called, "abuse".  There are many such examples.

But this can happen in the Church of God also.

I heard a sermon by a Church of God minister in which he listed learning "new truth" as a sinful compromise along with things like working on the Sabbath, watching our own entertainment on the Sabbath, neglecting attending Sabbath services, being too busy to pray, study, and fast, etc.

What did he mean by "new truth"?  He meant new knowledge.  Specifically, the context indicates he was talking about new doctrinal knowledge from the Bible.  Someone can rightly say that truth doesn't change, and that is technically correct, but our knowledge changes.  Our knowledge can be incorrect.  There can be mistakes in our knowledge.  Knowledge can be incomplete.  As the apostle Paul said, we know only in part (1 Corinthians 13:9).  So when we correct our mistakes or add to our knowledge from the Bible, we are learning new knowledge.  We are learning things we did not know before.  And that is not a sin.  It is good when we let God teach us new things from the Bible.  Calling it sin and comparing it with Sabbath breaking or neglecting prayer, Bible study, and fasting is calling good evil.

Think about it.  If it is a sin to learn new things from the Bible and from God who inspired the Bible and talks to us through the Bible, was it a sin for Loma Armstrong to learn about the Sabbath from the Bible?  Was it a sin for Mr. Armstrong to learn about the Sabbath and the holy days from the Bible?  Was it a sin for Mr. Armstrong to learn about the identity of the lost tribes of Israel from the Bible?  Was it a sin for thousands of radio listeners who heard Mr. Armstrong say, don't believe me, believe your Bible, to look up the scriptures and learn that their old traditional beliefs were wrong and turn to God and let God teach them new things from the Bible?  We would not be here if they had not done that.  Do we call that sin?  Do we call good evil?

Church of God Seventh Day was not willing to learn the new knowledge from the Bible that Mr. Armstrong and Loma Armstrong were learning and teaching.  So God could not use Church of God Seventh Day to do a great work.  He used Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong and the radio listeners who were willing to learn new knowledge.

I cannot imagine Mr. Armstrong calling the learning of new knowledge from the Bible "sin" or "evil".

I wish more people would read Mr. Armstrong's autobiography.

No one should make an idol out of Mr. Armstrong.  You do that when you believe him and his writings more than what you see in the Bible for yourself. That is wrong.

But if you are going to make an idol out of him, at least get to know the idol you are worshipping.  Don't worship what you don't know.  Worship what you know.  Mr. Armstrong put the effort into writing his autobiography because he wanted you to read it.

Learn about Mr. Armstrong before you worship him.  Then decide who you will worship.

You will learn the way of life he lived. He was always willing to learn new truth from the Bible, even when that new truth was contrary to Church of God doctrine and traditions.  

You may say, but he was an apostle and that makes it different.

But he was not an apostle before he was baptized.  He was not an apostle before he was ordained a minister.  He did not think of himself as an apostle for many years.  Yet, he was already practicing the way of life of believing the Bible more than the Church and being willing to learn new truth that the Church of God did not have and did not agree with.

But even if you want to insist that he was an apostle before he was baptized and when he learned that we are required to keep the holy days, contrary to Church of God teachings and practice, Loma Armstrong was never an apostle and she started doing this before Mr. Armstrong and showed him the way.

And thousands of radio listeners did it after Mr. Armstrong told them, don't believe me, don't believe any minister or church, believe the Bible, believe God.

Christ said we would know false prophets by their fruits.  "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 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. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them" (Matthew 7:15-20).  

What were the fruits of the willingness of Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong to learn new knowledge compared with the fruits of those who rejected new knowledge in favor of their traditions?  Doesn't the bad fruit of rejecting new knowledge from the Bible show that that approach is a bad tree?  Doesn't the good fruit of Church of God growth and the conversion and salvation of thousands who were willing to learn new knowledge from the Bible show that that approach is a good tree?  Yet the COG minister I mentioned listed it as a sin.

And what about those today in the world who hear our message, who hear us preach the true gospel?  Is is sin for them to check the Bible and learn new things and learn where their traditional beliefs they grew up in are wrong?

Yet, some in the Church, being part of a fellowship that tries to preach the gospel to the world, in effect asking the public to learn new things from the Bible, allow a minister to call learning new knowledge evil, calling good evil.

And some in the Church of God make an idol of Mr. Armstrong, telling members to believe Mr. Armstrong more than what they see in their own Bibles, and they call that good.  They call idolatry good, calling evil good.

I cannot imagine God blessing such people with success in preaching the gospel to the world when to their own members they teach that learning something new from the Bible is evil, a sin like Sabbath-breaking, while they try to teach new things to the public.

When we reject new knowledge from the Bible, when we tell God not to teach us any new doctrine or to correct any doctrinal mistakes we might have, we are rejecting the Bible and the God who inspired it. Mr. Armstrong correctly taught us that the Bible is the word of God in print and Christ is the Word of God in person, the same word.  When we reject the Bible we reject Christ.

When we reject new knowledge from the Bible we make ourselves like thousands of listeners who reject our message because they are not willing to let the Bible show them where they are wrong in their doctrines.  And as God rejects them until they repent, so He will reject us until we repent.

If we refuse to let Christ correct us in doctrine with the Bible, we may give Him no choice but to correct us with punishment.

We can ignore the Bible, we can ignore and reject new truth and correction, but we cannot ignore trials and punishments designed to bring us to repentance.  "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent" (Revelation 3:19).

God will speak to us one way or another.

God promises us priesthood in the millennium, but not if we reject new knowledge.  "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.  Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being priest for Me; Because you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children" (Hosea 4:6).

No wonder Christ pictures Himself as outside of the Laodicean Church, knocking to come in.  "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me" (Revelation 3:20).

Those who refuse to learn new knowledge from the Bible or correct mistakes in Church doctrine are excluding Christ from the Church.  Christ has to knock to ask to come in.

David, a man after God's heart (1 Samuel 13:14, Acts 13:22), and possibly other writers of Psalms, often asked God to teach him (Psalm 25:4-5, Psalm 27:11, Psalm 86:11, Psalm 119:12, Psalm 119:26, Psalm 119:33, Psalm 119:64-68, Psalm 119:108, Psalm 119:124, Psalm 119:135, Psalm 143:10).

We should be willing to let the Bible teach us new knowledge and correct our mistakes.  Jesus Christ endorsed the principle of learning new things.  The Pharisees were not willing to learn or go beyond their traditions.  And the Church of God Seventh Day was not willing to learn the new things that Mr. Armstrong was learning and teaching.

Those who say, we will not learn any new doctrinal knowledge, are like the Pharisees or like the Church of God Seventh Day.  How can God use them?

"Then He spoke a parable to them:  'No one puts a piece from a new garment on an old one; otherwise the new makes a tear, and also the piece that was taken out of the new does not match the old. And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the wineskins and be spilled, and the wineskins will be ruined. But new wine must be put into new wineskins, and both are preserved. And no one, having drunk old wine, immediately desires new; for he says, "The old is better" ' " (Luke 5:36-39).

"Then He said to them, 'Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old' " (Matthew 13:52).

Those who reject correction and new knowledge from the Bible are rejecting Christ and are rejected Mr. Armstrong who practiced the way of life of learning new knowledge from the Bible and being corrected by the Bible.

Mr. Armstrong said that it is harder to unlearn error than to learn new knowledge.  Let us be willing to let God both teach us new knowledge from the Bible and correct us when we are wrong in doctrine.

The Danger of Lying to Someone in the Church

Most of us are familiar with the story early in Acts of Ananias and Sapphira who died because they lied to Peter.

"But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. And he kept back part of the proceeds, his wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles' feet. But Peter said, 'Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.' Then Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and breathed his last....Now it was about three hours later when his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. And Peter answered her, 'Tell me whether you sold the land for so much?' She said, 'Yes, for so much.' Then Peter said to her, 'How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.' Then immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last...." (Acts 5:1-10).

I have heard this passage referred to by a minister who said that this demonstrated how serious a sin it is in God's sight to lie to a minister.  But is that what this passage says?  Certainly it is a serious sin to lie to a minister.  But if that is all we get out of this, I think we are missing something.

What did Peter say?  He did not say, you have lied to an apostle.  He did not say, you have lied to a minister.  He did not emphasize those aspects of the sin.  He said, you have lied to the Holy Spirit.  Why did Ananias lie to the Holy Spirit?  Because he lied to Peter who had the Holy Spirit dwelling in him.  That is what Peter emphasized.  He lied to someone having the Holy Spirit, and in doing so, he lied to the Holy Spirit and he lied to God.

So according to the way Peter worded it, the seriousness of the sin did not necessarily come from lying to an apostle or to a minister but lying to someone with the Holy Spirit, in other words, lying to a converted Church member.

So it can be potentially just as serious for a minister to lie to a member, or many members if he lies to a whole congregation or Church fellowship, as it is for a member to lie to a minister.

How serious?  God killed Ananias and Sapphira because of their lie.  God killed them because they lied to a converted Church member, someone with the Holy Spirit, and by so doing they were lying to God.  They lied to Peter.

No doubt this sin was made more serious because Peter was an apostle, but that is not the aspect that God emphasizes.

God shows the seriousness of the sin by the example he made of Ananias and Sapphira.  God killed them.

Any minister can make a mistake.  An honest mistake is not a lie.  But it is very serious, and dangerous, for a minister or Church leader to deliberately and knowingly twist scriptures from their intended meaning or tell a lie to his Church fellowship, to a congregation, or to a Church member.  When he is doing this, he is lying to God.  When he lies to converted Christians who have the Holy Spirit in them, he is lying to the Holy Spirit and he is lying to God.  He is committing the same sin as Ananias and Sapphira.

God gives us this passage as an example, to warn us.  This is a warning to ministers and members alike.  If you lie to a converted Church member, you are lying to the Holy Spirit and you are lying to God.

"Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds" (Colossians 3:9).

"You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it" (John 8:44).

"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).

God is reproducing Himself in us, and we are to become like God in character.  And God cannot lie (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18).

I have previously written that if we lie to anyone, not just a Church member, God can bring our ways on our own heads by taking the truth away from us and allowing Satan to deceive us.  We can go into the great tribulation as a result and only wake up when it is too late.

But it is especially serious to lie to other members in the Church of God.

Let us practice the way of truth.  Let us not lie.  Let us put on the character of Christ and God the Father who cannot lie.

Is There Too Much Emphasis on Getting the Bride Ready?

We have all read the scripture that says, "Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready" (Revelation 19:7).  And we are often encouraged to make the changes in our lives we need to make so we can be saved.

It is good to place a certain amount of emphasis on these things.

But making ourselves ready and getting into the kingdom of God - being personally saved - can be overemphasized.

This can be overemphasized at the expense of doing God's work for the benefit of others, especially getting the true gospel and the Ezekiel warning out to all the nations of Israel before the great tribulation begins so that the people know that God was fair to warn them while they had time to repent - to warn them about things they are doing that they do not know are wrong.  To properly repent and turn to God and have faith in God and accept Jesus Christ as personal savior, the people need to trust God.  That trust, and the salvation that results, is made more difficult if people are plunged into the punishment of the great tribulation for doing things God never warned them about - things they think are right because God never sent them a message telling them they are wrong.  They will feel they never had a chance to escape the punishment and that God is unfair.  This will make their repentance and salvation more difficult, and thus, less likely.  Millions may go into the lake of fire as a result.

This situation is not the same as in the first century.  Our time is unique.  The existing generation is part of this age of man when Satan deceives the whole world, yet will live into the millennium.  In that millennium, salvation will be opened to all.  Satan will be put away.  All will be called to salvation.

That means that the messages we preach to the public will be heard by millions WHO WILL BE CALLED.  They may have limited understanding and belief now, but that will change in their lifetimes.  After Christ returns, Satan is put away, and these people are called to salvation, many will be able to remember what we told them.  Our message to them now will be part of their calling and preparation for conversion in the millennium.  That has never been true before.

We are instructing the first generation of the millennium.

Should our primary focus be on helping these people be saved by getting a message out to them or on saving ourselves?

One focus is inward and the other is outward.

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

Notice Christ said, for the gospel's sake.  That sounds like an emphasis on the outgoing work of helping to save others through the message of the gospel and the Ezekiel warning, not an emphasis on the inward-focused work of getting ourselves ready so we can be saved.

I want to paint a hypothetical scenario to help illustrate this, and I will ask, what would you do?

Imagine that you are attending a Church of God fellowship you regard as spiritually strong and faithful.  You respect the leader.  He is a good speaker, he shows love towards the membership, and he is honest with the scriptures.

Now imagine that the work of preaching the gospel is being done, not only by your own fellowship, but by many Church of God fellowships.  It seems that Christ has opened the doors and the gospel is going out with ever-increasing power to millions, like it did when Mr. Armstrong was alive.  Every week that goes by thousands more people hear the truth for the first time, and many are responding.  All the tithes you and others pay, all your offerings, all your prayers for the work, seem to be producing good fruit week by week.

You are working and have an income and are joyful to be helping to get the message out.

But even while the work of the Church is doing great, conditions in the world are horrible.  The United States is terribly weak and on the edge of collapse.  Europe has become militarily the strongest power in the world.  Conflict between America and Europe is near the breaking point and war can break out at any time.  We are in a severe drought and food shortages are beginning.  It seems obvious that the tribulation is almost upon us.

More than that, it is the time of the year for fleeing.  It is the spring.  We cannot know the year but we can estimate the time of year when the tribulation will begin.

Everyone in the Church of God is anticipating a call to flee to a place of safety very soon.

Then one day, your pastor, the leader of the fellowship you attend, the man you greatly respect, has a special announcement.  He says that God has told him it is time to flee, the great tribulation will soon begin this year.  Maybe he had a dream or a vision.  Maybe God communicated with him some other way.  But the command goes out - we are fleeing now.

Everyone in your group is getting ready to flee.  Things are getting organized.  But all the other COG fellowships are not fleeing.

You know something about the place of safety.  There will be no Internet.  There will be no post office.  You cannot work from home in the place of safety.  You cannot contribute to the preaching of the gospel and the Ezekiel warning.  Going to the place of safety means the end of your being able to send money or help get the message out.  One or more other COG fellowships is not going to the place of safety and they are still doing the work.

And while the work has been increasing, there are still millions yet to reach who have not heard our message.

Any fulfillment of prophecies that directly tie in with fleeing, such as the abomination of desolation, is not 100% clear.  Maybe those prophecies have been fulfilled or maybe not, depending on how you interpret events. But the leader of your fellowship is clear.  The time to flee is now.

The two witnesses have not been made known yet.  Maybe there are a couple of individuals who seem like they would be the ones.  They will be given miraculous power at the very beginning of the great tribulation, after the Church has fled to a place of safety.

That is the scenario.  Here is my question.

Will you go?  Will you obey the pastor of your fellowship and go to the place of safety as he tells you?  Or will you stay behind, risking going through the horrors of the tribulation if your pastor is right?

If you go, your contribution to getting the true gospel and the Ezekiel warning message out to those who have not heard it yet will come to an end.  Fewer people will hear the warning.  But if you stay, you could be buying a lot of suffering and martyrdom not only for you but for your family also.  And if you are weak, you may cave in under duress and torture and sin rather than die for the truth and end up losing your salvation.

And even at this late date, the message can make a difference to those who hear it.  Some may respond positively, even in a few days, even as the people of Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah and escaped punishment (Jonah 3:1-10).  God may spare them from the worst of the suffering and bring them into the millennium.  The message can still make a difference.

Maybe your pastor is wrong.  Maybe his dream was not from God.  "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1).  

You want to respect God's government.  You want to obey authority (Hebrews 13:7, 17).  But you don't want to stop helping others while there are still a lot of people to warn.

What would you do?

For myself, I cannot say for sure what I would do in the future.  I have free moral agency, but I cannot make tomorrow's decisions today.

But as I consider this scenario now, I am inclined to think I should stay and continue to contribute to the work while there is still work to do, while there is still the opportunity to help others be saved.  I think that is what God would want me to do.  Not to try to save myself.  To try to save thousands or millions of others.

Paul can be an example.  He said in a certain place that he might be willing to be accursed from Christ, to lose his salvation, for the sake of saving others.

"I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh" (Romans 9:1-3).

Yes, we should make ourselves ready.  But should that be our primary focus? Or should our first priority be doing God's work of getting the message out to help the salvation of millions?

What is your focus?

The Main Thing Is to Keep the Main Thing the Main Thing

I have heard someone in the Church of God say, "The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing".

But what is the main thing?

Some will say, "The main thing is to make it into the kingdom of God".

I disagree.

Others may add to that, "and to help others in the Church of God, our brethren, also make it into the kingdom".

Again, I disagree.

If that is what you think, you and I are not on the same page.

"What can be more important than making it into the kingdom and helping the brethren make it into the kingdom?", you ask.

I will tell you.

This is what I think is, "the main thing".

The eternal salvation of millions of people is potentially at stake.  And God's glory and name and reputation for love and fairness for all eternity is at stake, and thus the quality of life in the kingdom forever is at stake.  That is what is more important.  

Here is the situation.

Millions of Americans, Canadians, Britons, and others are headed for the great tribulation without a warning.  They are going to be punished for things like Christmas, Easter, Sunday, etc. they don't know are wrong.  They don't know because no one has told them.  

Without that warning God will seem unfair, and it will be hard for the people to ever trust God and repent.  Many may not be able to do it and will go into the lake of fire and lose salvation forever, and the rest of us can struggle for eternity to understand how God could be fair in not giving a warning while there was time for the people to repent and escape.

That warning has not gone out, and there is not a single Church of God organization that is faithful to qualify to do it, as far as I know.  NOT ONE!  All are disqualified.  

That is why some ordained minister must raise up a new group and be faithful to qualify to get that message out to the millions.  That is, unless a leader of an existing Church of God fellowship repents and follows Christ in the basic principles needed to get the message out powerfully, but that does not appear likely.

This is a lot more important than unity.

If the Church of God won't do it (to our shame), I trust God that He will get that message out even if He has to use a Protestant minister or a Catholic priest to do it.

We have to get the true gospel message and the Ezekiel warning out to all in the nations of Israel.  And if necessary, some full-time minister or local elder, someone ordained as a minister who can baptize, lay on hands for the receiving of the Holy Spirit, and receive tithes, must raise up a new group to do it.

To me, this is the main thing.

If a COG minister who is best qualified and has the opportunity to do it does not want to do it because he thinks some so-called "unity" with Laodiceans is more important, then the job must fall to someone else.

The responsibility is on the shoulders of every minister including local elders in the whole Church of God, whether they realize it or not.

Doing God's essential work for the sake of His name and reputation and glory and for the sake of the salvation of millions is more important than peace and unity in the Church of God in this Laodicean era.

To me, that is the "main thing".

Jason Fritts Sermons Removed from CGA Website

Someone mentioned in comments, and I have confirmed, that Mr. Jason Fritts's sermons have been removed from the CGA website.

This raises questions in my mind, and may in the minds of CGA members and former members.

Why?

What valid reason according to God's perfect law of love can there be for removing those sermons?

Is there something wrong with those sermons?  If so, why were they posted to the CGA website for so long?

Were those sermons beneficial and spiritually profitable?  Producing spiritually profitable sermons was one of the things CGA, out of members' tithes and offerings, was paying Mr. Fritts to do.  He was paid to feed the flock.  In a sense, the members paid him to feed them through their tithes and offerings.  In a sense, one could say that those sermons belong to the members and former members of CGA who paid Mr. Fritts to give them.

Did Mr. Fritts fail to do a good job with his sermons?  Apparently not according to CGA which posted his sermons for years.  If there was something wrong with them, why were they on the website for so long?  And why would CGA for years pay Mr. Fritts a salary if he was making bad sermons?

Have those sermons been helpful to members to go back and review past lessons?  I think so.

So why were they removed?

Were they removed because Mr. Fritts was causing division by raising up a new COG fellowship and trying to draw members out of CGA and into his own organization?  I don't think so.  I have heard no indication he has started a new group or is in the process of forming a new group.

Apparently he was fired for sticking to both the Bible and the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong, and then he quietly began to attend someplace else, not causing division, not starting a new group.  I have listened to his sermons for years and I cannot recall him ever saying anything that contradicted CGA, Mr. Monson, or Mr. Armstrong.  He left as quietly as one could.  He has done his best not to cause division, as far as I can see.

So why take down his sermons that can be helpful to both CGA members and non-members alike?  Why take down those sermons that can help Church of God members draw closer to God?  Is that love?

CGA has repeatedly emphasized the point that they will not change Mr. Armstrong's doctrines.  They will not add to or change the doctrines he taught.  They think that they are holding fast to the truths he taught, thinking they are Philadelphians to whom Christ says, "hold fast", yet not holding fast to the way of life he and Loma practiced, the way of learning new things from the Bible and believing the Bible more than any man or church.

How ironic that the one issue that has seriously divided CGA was not some new doctrine or change someone proposed but one of the very points of doctrine that Mr. Armstrong was right about.  Mr. Armstrong taught that Jesus Christ is part of the true gospel.  That is also what the Bible teaches.

This was not "new truth".  This was what Mr. Armstrong taught.

And yet, here we seem to have a case where a leading minister was put out for sticking to what Mr. Armstrong correctly taught.

How unnecessary all this has been.  Anyone can make a mistake, and CGA could simply have admitted the mistake in not following Mr. Armstrong and the Bible correctly, and fixed it.  The members could have accepted that.  It would even be refreshing to hear the leader of a group say, I made a mistake.

So apparently CGA picks and chooses what teachings of Mr. Armstrong to keep and which ones to throw out.  Makeup also comes to mind.  Mr. Armstrong telling the Church before he died to follow the next pastor general (Mr. Tkach) also comes to mind.

And CGA is willing to divide the entire fellowship over the choices of what to retain and what to throw out from Mr. Armstrong's doctrines, but not according to God's word.

So what is the motive for removing Mr. Fritts's sermons?  Love?  Love for God and love for the brethren?  Agape love?  Philadelphia love?

Christ told Peter, "Feed My sheep".  For years, Mr. Fritts has done that.  Then, CGA removes that good spiritual food from the website.

So again, what is the motive?  Love?  Spite?  Fear?

Fear of what?  Mr. Fritts drawing members after himself?  But he has gone out of his way not to do that.  He has not started a new group nor apparently does he want to.  You couldn't leave more quietly and peacefully than he did.

It gets worse than that.  Every service has an opening prayer in which the man giving the prayer asks God's blessing on the service and asks God to bless the speaking.  Presumably God does that.  God the Father and Jesus Christ help to inspire the sermon.  That does not mean that the sermon speaker cannot make a mistake or always follows exactly where Christ leads.  They are human and can make mistakes.  Nevertheless, to the degree God answers the opening prayer for inspiration and blessing on the service, God is involved.

So those sermons that CGA has removed are not just the work of Mr. Jason Fritts but also the work of Christ.

So what Christ has built, CGA has torn down.

Removing Mr. Fritts's sermons from the CGA website has been a serious mistake in judgment.

I hope CGA will reconsider and restore Mr. Fritts's past sermons to their website.

"Therefore by their fruits you will know them" (Matthew 7:20).

If you have not done so yet, check out my last post for some details about what has happened and been happening.  This was published shortly before this one, so if you only check my blog every few days and look at the most recent post, you might miss noticing it.  Check it out.

Recent Comments about Jason Fritts and the Issue of Christ Being Part of the Gospel

For those who are following the situation with Mr. Fritts, and also the issue of Christ being part of the gospel, there have appeared a number of informative comments under the posts regarding Mr. Fritts I have published since the first one I published on 5/25/26. I have published 6 posts so far including this one.  I suggest, for those interested, that you look at the comments under each one.  There are a number of new comments, some of them mine, but not together - they are under a number of different posts.

In one of my comments I referred to one or more past posts of mine on the subject of Acts 5, Ananias lying to Peter.

I have searched for that post, and found it.  Perhaps there is more than one if you search earlier than this one.  Look at the post titled, "Is It Ever Right for a Christian to Lie?", dated October 18, 2020.

I make the point that Peter did not accuse Ananias of lying to an apostle or to a minister.  Ananias lied to God.  How?  By lying to an apostle or minister?  No, it doesn't say that.  He lied to God by lying to the Holy Spirit.  How did he do that? By lying to a member who had the Holy Spirit in him.

In other words, the Bible doesn't say that this was serious in God's sight because Peter was an apostle.  It was serious because Peter had the Holy Spirit.

But by the same principle, it can also be serious when if a minister lies to a Church of God member who has the Holy Spirit.  As I understand this lesson, a minister who lies to his members who have the Holy Spirit is lying to God!

And members who support and follow that minister have to bear some responsibility, if they stay with him after knowing that he lies, because God says, "Keep yourself far from a false matter; do not kill the innocent and righteous. For I will not justify the wicked" (Exodus 23:7).  Also, "You shall not circulate a false report. Do not put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness" (Exodus 23:1).

I am not trying to be overly harsh, but that is what God says.

Also, God does not have kind words for ordained ministers who abandon the flock.

"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep" (John 10:11-13).

"And the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 'Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy and say to them, "Thus says the Lord GOD to the shepherds: 'Woe to the shepherds of Israel who feed themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flocks? You eat the fat and clothe yourselves with the wool; you slaughter the fatlings, but you do not feed the flock. The weak you have not strengthened, nor have you healed those who were sick, nor bound up the broken, nor brought back what was driven away, nor sought what was lost; but with force and cruelty you have ruled them. So they were scattered because there was no shepherd; and they became food for all the beasts of the field when they were scattered. My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and on every high hill; yes, My flock was scattered over the whole face of the earth, and no one was seeking or searching for them.' " '  Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD: 'As I live,' says the Lord GOD, 'surely because My flock became a prey, and My flock became food for every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, nor did My shepherds search for My flock, but the shepherds fed themselves and did not feed My flock' - therefore, O shepherds, hear the word of the LORD! Thus says the Lord GOD: 'Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require My flock at their hand; I will cause them to cease feeding the sheep, and the shepherds shall feed themselves no more; for I will deliver My flock from their mouths, that they may no longer be food for them' " (Ezekiel 34:1-10).

"So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, 'Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?' He said to Him, 'Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.' He said to him, 'Feed My lambs.' He said to him again a second time, 'Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?' He said to Him, 'Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.' He said to him, 'Tend My sheep.' He said to him the third time, 'Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?' Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, 'Do you love Me?' And he said to Him, 'Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.' Jesus said to him, 'Feed My sheep' " (John 21:15-17).

Sometimes it takes time for a minister, or any member, to sort things out and come to know God's will for them.  I understand that.  Nevertheless, it is good to be reminded of the overall truth, regardless of how details fall, that an ordained minister has a calling to serve God's people, and in some cases, to preach the gospel and the Ezekiel warning to Israel to prepare our nations for the great tribulation that is coming.  This should be motivated by love for our neighbors and for our brethren in the Church of God.

 
 

Did Herbert W. Armstrong Teach that Salvation through Christ Is Part of the Gospel?

The question, what is the true gospel, has been controversial in the Church, even today, to the extent it was a contributing cause for a split.  

As I see it so far, and I am yet to hear both sides fully, one side says that the true gospel is only the good news of the coming kingdom of God and that salvation through Christ is not part of that gospel, even though it also should be taught.  The other side says that salvation through Christ is definitely part of the true gospel.

What did Mr. Armstrong teach?  Did he teach that salvation through Jesus Christ is part of the true gospel when that gospel includes the kingdom of God?

This question may be important to some because some people and groups think that Mr. Armstrong's teachings should never be changed.  So if such a person or group follows Mr. Armstrong more than the Bible, the question for them can be important.

In examining Mr. Armstrong's teaching on this subject I will examine his teachings in two books, Mystery of the Ages and The Incredible Human Potential.  

Mystery of the Ages does not have a lot on what is included in the term, the true gospel.  It teaches all the major truths of the gospel, but does not say a lot about that term, "gospel".

On page 200 of Mystery of the Ages, top half of page, Mr. Armstrong writes that Jesus Christ taught His disciples the true gospel of the kingdom of God, and that this included the whole purpose of God in creating the human race.

On page 257, top half, he writes that the churches of this world omit the teaching that Christ is coming as king and ruler, and thus reject Christ's gospel message.  This agrees with what I have said that a message about Christ but without the teaching of the coming government of God is a false gospel.

From the bottom of page 278 through page 279, Mr. Armstrong says that false teachers taught a false gospel, teaching Christ as savior but omitting the teaching that sin is the transgression of the law of God, omitting the coming kingdom of God, the removal of Satan, the government of God ruling the earth, and the opening of salvation to all of humanity, snd that men can become literal sons of God and members of God's family as actual God beings.  By the way this is worded, Mr. Armstrong is implying that all these things that a false gospel message omits are part of the true gospel.

In The Incredible Human Potential, page 1 bottom half through page 2 top half, Mr. Armstrong says that the true gospel, when fully understood, reveals the incredible human potential, the way to peace and happiness, the most necessary information about the human race, the true values, and how man's awesome human potential may be achieved (in other words, how we can be saved).

In the last part of page 10 through all of page 11 he says that the gospel explains the origin of Satan the devil and how he became the great deceiver of mankind.  He says that the true gospel, had it been heeded, could have prevented all the human misery that has occurred, thus indicating that the true gospel includes knowledge of the law and ways of God.  He says that the true gospel includes all these truths: the earth's first prehistoric inhabitants, the reason man was created, the cause of evil and suffering, the nature of the human mind, and what spiritual salvation is and why we need it.

Can we see from this how all-encompassing is the truth included in the true gospel according to Mr. Armstrong?  Since it includes information about salvation, it must include everything about Christ and His sacrifice so we can be saved.

On page 12, middle, he says that the true gospel reveals a wide range of knowledge from God.

On page 15, bottom half, he says that a complete understanding of the message Christ brought from the Father, the gospel, involves an overall understanding of everything.  

On page 16, top half of page, Mr. Armstrong writes that if those in the world who preach what may be called a gospel of salvation really understood and taught what salvation is and how we can be saved, it could be part of the true gospel.  

On page 32, Mr. Armstrong says that the subject of the kingdom of God is an all-encompassing subject.  It includes the pre-history of the universe.

On page 160, top half of page, Mr. Armstrong states that the kingdom of God is both the government of God and the family of God.

It is clear that Mr. Armstrong taught that the true gospel, the good news of the coming kingdom of God, is a broad subject that includes much Bible truth including matters of salvation through Christ made possible by His sacrifice.

If someone today teaches that salvation through Christ is not part of the true gospel of the kingdom of God, they are contradicting Mr. Armstrong.

I recently heard a sermon published by Living Church of God by Mr. Wallace Smith entitled, "The Centrality of Jesus Christ".  In it he shows by quoting from Mr. Armstrong that Mr. Armstrong taught that salvation through Jesus Christ was part of the gospel.  He quotes from letters or other publications of Mr. Armstrong besides the parts of Mr. Armstrong's books I referred to.  I thought the sermon was good and I reccmmend it.

As I explained in a previous post, the word "and" in a passage such as Acts 8:12 where it says, "But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized", does not necessarily mean that the gospel of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ are separate things, but that word "and" can be used for emphasis.  This is saying that both were preached, not that one or the other is not part of the gospel.

For someone who teaches that Mr. Armstrong's teachings should not be changed or added to to say that the name of Jesus Christ and salvation through Jesus Christ are not part of the gospel seems inconsistent to me.  If you are going to change Mr. Armstrong's teaching on this point, at least admit you are changing his doctrine.  To just say that the name of Christ and the gospel should both be preached but are distinct but related things is not sufficient.  The name of Jesus Christ is definitely part of the gospel.  And if you want to say that this is only a matter of terminology - what's the difference as long as we preach both? - then why should it be so important as to split the Church of God over it?

If terminology is important - do we call salvation through Christ a part of the gospel or say it is something separate though related that must also be taught? - then those who say that it is not part of the gospel are wrong according to Mr. Armstrong, they are wrong according to the Bible, and they are wrong - period.

They should admit error, publicly correct their mistake, and teach the truth.

But they will accept correction only if they are wise.  "He who corrects a scoffer gets shame for himself, And he who rebukes a wicked man only harms himself. Do not correct a scoffer, lest he hate you; Rebuke a wise man, and he will love you. Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be still wiser; Teach a just man, and he will increase in learning" (Proverbs 9:7-9).