Can We Be Too Close to Falsehood?

"Keep yourself far from a false matter; do not kill the innocent and righteous. For I will not justify the wicked. And you shall take no bribe, for a bribe blinds the discerning and perverts the words of the righteous" (Exodus 23:7-8).

God's law prohibits lying, and God Himself cannot lie (Exodus 20:16, Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18, Colossians 3:9).

But the above passage I quoted tells us not to go near a false matter.  That goes a bit further than not lying.

Some members stay with an organization that they know is preaching falsehood, thinking, "I am not personally lying, so it is not my responsibility".

Maybe.

There has to be a balance here.  We are commanded to attend services if possible, and in this Laodicean era you will be hard pressed to find anywhere a perfect Church of God fellowship that never teaches anything false, much less in your area.  I don't say you should leave an organization over small errors or mistakes.

But if it is teaching falsely on important matters, you may want to review your options in light of the above passage.

But if it is a small matter, stay unless a better option opens up.

Jesus Christ attended Sabbath services regularly (Luke 4:16), yet those services were largely based on the false teachings of the Pharisees.  This must have been frustrating for Jesus to hear false teachings in the synagogues every Sabbath and sit there.  Yet he did it for the sake of attending services on the Sabbath.

Likewise, to obey God and keep the Sabbath, we may have to sit and endure what we know are errors preached by the ministry.

Up to a point.

Philadelphians are those who go out.  The message to the Philadelphians hints at this.  Christ reassures Philadelphians that they will go out no more, in the kingdom of God.  Why would Christ emphasize this reassurance to Philadelphians unless Philadelphians, in this life, have often had to suffer "going out" of an organization?

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

Some may be staying in a false organization in hopes of promotion.  Maybe they can be ordained as a minister.  If that happens, they then can do more for God's work when and if they eventually leave.  But that promotion may never come, and in the meantime, the clock is ticking to end-time events.  Someone might become a leader of the fellowship they attend.  But that is not sure.  Also, if the whole organization has been compromised for years, if ministers have been selected and ordained and promoted to positions of power based on their loyalty to men rather than to God, what kind of organization would a new leader inherit?  How do you replace long-time compromised ministers with faithful ministers in the short time we have left to do a work?  Decades of unfaithfulness would have to be cleaned up and rooted out, and that would take a long time.  Starting a new group from scratch now rather than later might be a better option. You can start clean.

Christ preached that new wine should be put into new wineskins.  He did not try to reform the Pharisees but to replace them with the Church.

"No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment, and the tear is made worse. Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved" (Matthew 9:16-17).

There are many factors to consider, and prayers are often needed for God's will to be made known.

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).

Mr. Jason Fritts

I don't have any new solid information about Mr. Fritts.  There are more questions than answers at this point.  But I hsve a few thoughts I will share.

It is apparent that he does not want to raise up a new Church of God fellowship.  That actually says something good about his character, that he is humbled by the responsibility of leading a new group and that he does not want to create more division than already exists in the whole Church of God.  I can empathize with him on that.

But God has ways of moving us in directions we do not want to go.  

When Mr. Fritts separated from Church of God Assembly (regardless of whether he was fired or quit), he may have thought he could join an existing group.  He has, after all, a lot to offer in terms of ability and experience.

Yet, his very experience and ability may make other groups hesitant to hire him.  There may be a fear he will leave after a while taking brethren with him.

How often do any of us set out to do something, assuming things will be a certain way, and finding they are not, whether or not we know the reason?

And if God is involved, He can easily block Mr. Fritts from being hired by any existing Church of God fellowship, if that is His will.  He may want Mr. Fritts to raise up a new group even if that is not Mr. Fritts's first choice.

I am curious about what Mr. Fritts has been doing the last several Sabbaths.  Does he attend someplace?  Does he tune in to live services someplace on the Internet (there are many available)?  Does he preach a sermon to a small group of his family and friends and a few Church of God members he knows, but without broadcasting services on the Internet?  Or does he broadcast to a few people but does not otherwise make himself known to everyone at this time?

I cannot imagine him only praying, reading the Bible, and sleeping on the Sabbath.

I would love to hear or read him explain in his own words what he believes the true gospel is.  If I am wrong in my views of what the true gospel is, maybe I could learn from him and be corrected.

He probably needs more time for God to work things out for him.  But the Feast is approaching, and there may be a lot of members whose plans are up in the air because of this.  And Oh, what a wide spectrum of views various ministers and members or former members of Church of God Assembly may have!

Is it safe to say this whole situation can be complicated?


On the world scene, the whole world, allies and enemies alike, is seeing the divisions and the weakness of the United States.  They also see our reluctance to be fully committed to defending their interests and their safety.  At the same time there are signs of weakness in the leadership of Russia and China.  Russia may have a new leader soon, and the same is possible for China.

Everything is in flux.  The world is fast-changing.  AI is growing.  

Europe, especially Germany, feels the need to become stronger militarily, independent of the United States.  They are rearming.  Things may take time, maybe several years, to work out.  But things are definitely moving in the direction that Bible prophecy predicts.

More on Salvation through Christ Being Part of the True Gospel

I have written on this in the last two posts, but I have something to add.  I want to give an analogy to show that information and details about good news is part of the good news itself.

The true gospel is the good news of the kingdom of God.  The kingdom of God is the family of God ruling the earth and the universe as the government of God.  Christ will return to set up His kingdom on this earth and with the resurrected saints as the family of God will rule the nations of the earth and bring happiness to all mankind.  That is good news.

I have said and maintained that any information and details about that kingdom is part of the good news and therefore part of the true gospel, provided the core teaching of God's kingdom being set up on this earth is included.  Without that core teaching about the kingdom, any information or details about salvation become a false gospel if presented as the gospel.  But with the core teaching of God's kingdom being set up on this earth, information about that kingdom, including how to enter that kingdom through salvation through Christ, becomes part of the good news and is part of the true gospel.

Here is the analogy.

Suppose you have an eighteen year old daughter living in your house.  She is a good driver and has always wanted a car but cannot afford one.  So you say to her, "I have good news.  I am going to give you a car".  

She is overjoyed.

Then you tell her some specifics.  "I have already purchased the car and it will be delivered sometime next week.  You like convertibles, so I got you a Cadillac convertible.  It is brand new.  I know red is your favorite color, so I ordered a red convertible.  Also, since you do not have a lot of money, I am paying for the insurance and gas for a full year".  You also tell her about all the features and accessories of the car.

Are those details not part of the good news that you are giving your daughter a car?  Of course they are.  They enhance the good news and are part of the good news.  Your daughter is happy she is getting a car - any car - but she is delighted that it is new, a convertible, and her favorite color, red.  She is even more happy when you tell her you are paying for the gas and insurance.  All of that is part of the good news.

But without the core message that she is getting a car, what good are the details?  Telling her you are giving her something red is not good news - it could be an apple!  It could be a radish and she doesn't like radishes.

Likewise, the main part of the true gospel is that God will set up His kingdom on the earth that will bring happiness to the earth.  For the establishment and the authority of that kingdom see Daniel 2:37-45.  For the happiness that will exist all over the earth, see Isaiah 2:2-4, Isaiah 25:6-8, Isaiah 11:6-9, Isaiah 35:5-7, Psalm 98:4-9, and many other passages you can find in the Old Testament.  With that as the core and focus of the message, all the details and information about that kingdom - how to enter that ruling family of God through salvation made possible by Christ's sacrifice, the law of God that will be practiced in the kingdom, the happiness that will spread all over the earth - all that becomes part of the good news of that kingdom and part of the true gospel.

Paul and others often focused on the sacrifice of Christ and salvation through Christ because the Jews and God-fearing Gentiles already knew about the government aspect and other aspects of the kingdom of God from the Old Testament.

They knew that God would set up a kingdom to rule this earth from the account in Daniel about Nebuchadnezzar's dream.  They knew that the earth would be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the oceans are full of water (Isaiah 11:9).  They knew that men would beat the swords into plowshares and would learn war no more (Isaiah 2:4). They knew that the wolf would dwell with the lamb and the lion would eat straw like the ox and no one would hurt or destroy (Isaiah 11:6-9).  They knew of the happiness that people all over the earth would enjoy because of God's rule.  Paul must have reminded them of those things from time to time, no doubt, but he concentrated on the parts they did not know - the sacrifice of Christ and salvation through Christ.  And the things he taught them about Christ and salvation through faith, not works, were definitely part of the true gospel because they included the good news of how men could be forgiven and enter that kingdom.

For someone to say that the kingdom is good news but information about that kingdom and why and how it will be happy is not part of the good news is, frankly, a little bit nuts.

Common sense should tell you that if something is good news, details and information about that thing is also part of the good news.

Now, this raises a question.  What should the Church of God focus on in preaching the true gospel?  What should we spend most of our time and money on, salvation through Christ or the family of God ruling the earth?

That is not a matter of doctrine but of policy.  What should our policy be?  How should we do the work?  How should we organize and present our material?

That is a judgment call the leaders and ministers of the Church must make.

I will offer my thoughts on that.

In Paul's day, most people knew about the government aspect of God's kingdom ruling the earth, but they didn't know about Christ.  Today, it is the opposite.  Most people in our western nations who believe in God know teachings about Christ but not about the government of God ruling the earth.

Paul often concentrated his teaching on Christ because that was the part they did not know.  Today, we can concentrate on God having a family and ruling the earth as the government of God because that is the part most people do not know.

Yet, there may be occasions when it is best and most effective to lead with the truth about salvation through Christ.  This would be for the purpose of establishing common ground with our audience.  You first talk about what you agree about, then from there lead your readers and listeners to new knowledge they do not have.  Paul sometimes used this approach.  "For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some" (1 Corinthians 9:19-22).  Also see Acts 17:22-23.

When to use what approach is a judgment call, but neither approach is wrong when used under the right circumstances.  It is all God's truth.


A word about Jason Fritts.  So far, I have not yet heard or read any information about what he is doing.  He may be very busy getting organized and setting things up.

But it occurred to me that he is better prepared to raise up a new fellowship than most leaders who have done so.  

He is young, energetic, and intelligent.  He has had recent experience working closely with Mr. Sheldon Monson setting up Church of God Assembly when that group came out of Living Church of God.  So he must know how these things work.  He probably has a todo list built into his brain with "how to" instructions for each item.  Most leaders who set up a new group were doing it for the first time.  This is a second time for him.  He has that advantage.

We will see.

More Evidence that Salvation through Christ Is Part of the True Gospel

Last post I talked about what is the true gospel.  I said that the heart and core of the true gospel is the family of God ruling as the government of God over the earth and the universe forever.  God is reproducing Himself, and it is His family made up of the saints made immortal as His children that will be that kingdom, and that kingdom will rule over the earth and the universe for eternity.  Christ will return and establish His kingdom over the earth and will, with the saints made immortal children of God, rule over the nations of this earth for one thousand years, and after that the white throne judgment, and after that the universe forever.

Salvation through Christ and everything about Christ is part of that true gospel as long as the family of God ruling as the government of God is maintained as the central theme of the gospel.  Without the message of the family and government of God - the kingdom of God - salvation through Christ becomes, by itself, a false gospel.  But with the message of the family and government of God as the kingdom of God, salvation through Christ becomes an important part of that gospel for two reasons.  It shows us how we can enter and be part of that kingdom, that ruling family of God, and that makes it good news for us.  But also, everything about Christ is part of the gospel of the kingdom of God because Christ will be king of that kingdom.  It adds necessary detail and information about that kingdom because it tells us about the king of that kingdom.

Since that post I remembered something else in the Bible that is evidence that salvation through Christ is part of the true gospel of the kingdom of God.

Study the book of Galatians.

It starts out, "I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:6-9).

This letter starts out by warning against a false gospel.  This sets an important theme of the whole letter.  This is not about some false teaching that is not a part of the gospel.  Whatever this pertains to, it involves the true gospel or a part of that true gospel.  It is not outside the gospel.  Someone is teaching something contrary to the true gospel of the kingdom of God, and Paul is warning the Galatians that by perverting the gospel of the kingdom of God they are in effect preaching a different and a false gospel.

So what does Paul talk about?  And what were the false teachers saying?  Were they denying the millennial rule of Christ?  Were they denying Christ returning to the earth to set up His kingdom?  Were they denying the family of God?

They were teaching circumcision and salvation through works.

After recounting how he learned about the gospel, Paul states, "Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised" (Galatians 2:3).

Notice, this is about circumcision.

Then Paul says, "And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you" (Galatians 2:4-5).

Ok, what has this to do with the millennial rule of Christ over the earth when He returns, the government aspect of the kingdom of God?  Or what has this to do with the family aspect of the kingdom of God, that God is reproducing Himself in mankind and that His family will be that kingdom?

Nothing.  Paul is talking about circumcision and liberty vs. bondage - right now in this life.  He is talking about the liberty we have in Christ.  That is a salvation issue, an issue regarding how we are justified and saved through Christ.  Yet he said he opposed this false teaching so that the truth of the gospel might continue in the Galatians.  So this is about salvation through Christ, but also about the true gospel.  Does that not show that salvation through Christ is part of the gospel?

A little later, Paul continues, "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified" (Galatians 2:15-16).

Paul is saying that salvation comes through faith in Christ not the works of the law.  This is a salvation issue.  Yet, it is apparently part of the gospel because Paul is refuting a false gospel - that is the theme of the whole letter!

Paul continues by stating the importance of obeying God's law and not sinning in verses 17 through 19.

Then Paul writes, "I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain" (Galatians 2:20-21).

This is still on the theme of the letter, the true gospel vs. a false gospel.  And still in this theme, Paul talks about the grace of God, righteousness not coming through the law, and Christ dying not in vain.

This is about salvation through Christ and His death, not about the millennium and the kingdom of God ruling the earth.  Yet it is about the gospel.  This is evidence that the gospel includes salvation through Christ.

Then, continuing in the theme of the true gospel vs. a false gospel, Paul says, "O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? - Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? Have you suffered so many things in vain - if indeed it was in vain? Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" (Galatians 3:1-5).  Paul is talking about the crucifixion of Christ and about the works of the law vs. hearing of faith.  These things are not about the millennial rule of Christ and the saints over the earth.  These things are about the sacrifice of Christ, his suffering and death, and the importance of faith.  These are matters of salvation not government.  Yet it is about the gospel.

Paul did not switch subjects when he said, "O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth" after starting his letter with "I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ".

Paul is on the same theme.  There were false teachers who were teaching a form of salvation by works, and Paul calls that a false gospel.  Yet they were not denying God setting up a kingdom on the earth.  So the government aspect of the kingdom of God is not the only thing that is the true gospel.  Salvation through Christ is part of the true gospel, otherwise denying salvation through Christ would not be a false gospel.

Later Paul writes, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love.  You ran well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. I have confidence in you, in the Lord, that you will have no other mind; but he who troubles you shall bear his judgment, whoever he is.  And I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why do I still suffer persecution? Then the offense of the cross has ceased. I could wish that those who trouble you would even cut themselves off!" (Galatians 5:1-12).

You can sense the emotion Paul feels as he makes his case.  This is all about salvation through Christ, faith, we are not justified by the works of the law, we do not have to be circumcised, etc.  

Yet, Paul starts his letter by talking about a false gospel vs. the true gospel.  And Paul spends nearly the whole letter persuading his readers of what the true gospel is!

And there is not a word in this epistle about Christ returning to rule the earth, about God reproducing himself in mankind, or about the millennial rule of Christ over the earth, all key aspects of the gospel of the kingdom of God.  But what Paul talks about is PART of the true gospel.  It ties in with the rule of Christ over the earth.  But salvation through Christ is a definite part of the true gospel.  And it is important, or else Paul would not call its perversion a false gospel.

So not only is salvation through Christ a part of the true gospel, it is a vital part, so vital that Paul calls its perversion a false gospel!

So, suppose someone came along today and preached that Christ would return and rule the earth with the saints.  That would be the true gospel of the kingdom of God, right?  Now, suppose they also taught that salvation is by works not faith.  Suppose they denied the sacrifice of Christ to pay for our sins.  Paul says that that false teaching is so serious it makes their message a false gospel.  And that could only be true if the truth about salvation through Christ were part of the true gospel.

The good news of the kingdom of God includes salvation through Christ.

Some might wonder why Paul's epistles do not contain more about Christ's return to rule the earth - the government aspect of the good news of the kingdom of God.

The answer may be that that was already known.  The Jews and those Gentiles that feared God and believed the scriptures already knew that God would establish His kingdom over the earth.  They knew that from the book of Daniel and many prophecies.  Paul emphasized that which they had to learn - salvation through Christ and all that that means.

And God did not need to inspire Paul to write about things that are made abundantly clear in other parts of the Bible, but God inspired Paul to write about other necessary parts of the gospel, namely, salvation through Christ and how we should be living today.

We can all agree, I think, that the millennial rule of Christ with the saints over the nations of the earth and the family of God into which we can enter are important parts of the good news of the kingdom of God, and I hope we can agree that they are the core parts, the focus of the message.  But to say that details of that message, information about how we can be saved through Christ and enter that kingdom, information about the king of that kingdom Jesus Christ, information about the law of God and way of life to be lived in that kingdom - and many other areas of knowledge about that kingdom - are not part of the true gospel is ludicrous.  

If the true gospel is the good news of the kingdom of God, than any information about that kingdom is also part of the true gospel.

In the broadest sense, that can include the whole Bible.

Jason Fritts No Longer Employed by CGA, and What Is the True Gospel?

As the title indicates, this is a two-part post.



Jason Fritts


Jason Fritts is no longer an employed minister with Church of God Assembly (CGA).  He has been removed from the list of ministers in the CGA website, along with Mr. Larry Alvario.  I have no information about Mr. Alvario.

Some time ago, Mr. Randy Wayne had also been removed from that list and Mr. Monson indicated he was no longer a minister with CGA.

The separation of Mr. Fritts apparently happened a few days before Pentecost.  It is not clear to me at this time if he was fired or quit.  But there was some difference between him and Mr. Monson.  This difference may be on the subject of what is the true gospel - I will address that question in this post.  What exactly Mr. Fritts believes on this subject and how it may differ from what Mr. Monson believes, I do not know.

I do not know of any website Mr. Fritts has at this time.

The separation of Mr. Fritts differs from that of Mr. Randy Wayne in that Mr. Wayne was not employed by CGA.  He was not a full-time minister.  He had his own work and income and was not a full-time employed minister dependent on a paycheck from the Church.  He was not put out of a job.  He can attend wherever he finds the best opportunity to attend God's Church.

As I understand it, that is not the case with Mr. Fritts.  He was employed full-time by CGA.  So he needs an income.

Being a young ordained minister and having been employed full-time by the Church, I do not expect him to retire or to seek employment outside the Church.  I think he will feel an obligation to God to continue to serve God as a minister, somewhere.

His options seem to be to try to find employment with another Church of God fellowship or to raise up a new Church of God fellowship.

If he raises up a new Church of God, I hope he will teach that Church and lead them to follow what I regard as three essential principles of Philadelphia.  

Those principles are:

1.  Top-down government.  The leader reports to Christ directly and is not elected by a board of men.  God shows He is using the man by the fruits over time.  No voting or "balloting" to elect leaders.

2.  Zeal for getting the true gospel and the Ezekiel warning message out to Israel and the world before the great tribulation begins.  This should be based on love for our neighbors who need the gospel and the warning message to prepare them for the tribulation to come.

3.  Willingness to believe and teach the Bible more than any man or tradition.  This means willingness to learn new knowledge from the Bible, to correct past mistakes, including mistakes by Mr. Armstrong (if there are any), and to examine proposed changes with an open mind.  This would mark a departure from the policy of CGA.  In effect, this would hold fast to the example and way of life of Mr. Armstrong rather than to a list of his doctrines.  But it also means that members should be taught to believe what they see in their Bibles more than what the leaders and ministers of any Church of God fellowship teach.  Members should not look to the ministry to interpret the Bible for them but to help them see for themselves how the Bible interprets the Bible.  Along with this must be the necessary teaching that the ministry has the authority to set official doctrine taught by the Church and any member who disagrees because he sees something different in the Bible should disagree quietly, not discussing the matter or contradicting the ministry in conversation with other members.

I hope that Mr. Fritts will soon set up a website and communicate where he stands on things and what his intentions are.  I look forward to hearing him.

I also pray for him that God will guide him and hear his prayers and help him in this time.  I also have prayed and will continue to pray that God will use him effectively in doing God's work.

I also hope and pray that, whatever Mr. Fritts decides to do, whatever Christ will lead him to do, there will be peace, and even cooperation to some degree, between Mr. Fritts and Mr. Monson.



What Is the True Gospel?


The true gospel is the good news of the coming kingdom of God, which will be established on this earth to rule the nations.  One of the best descriptions of this good news is given in the Old Testament, in the book of Daniel.

After describing several earthly kingdoms that would arise, this passage says: "And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold - the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure" (Daniel 2:44-45).

That is the heart and core of the gospel message.  And God setting up a kingdom to rule this earth must be in the message for it to be the true gospel.  Exclude this, and you have a false gospel.

But is that the whole gospel?  Is salvation through Jesus Christ part of the gospel?

The true gospel is a massive subject.  The core is God ruling over the earth.  That is like the trunk of the tree.  But a healthy tree has many branches and twigs that are part of the tree too.  You can take away some of the branches and you still have a tree, but if you take away the trunk you have no tree, just a pile of deadwood and kindling made up of dead and dried twigs and branches.

If all you taught was that God would establish His kingdom ruling over the earth, that would technically be the true gospel, but it would not be very complete.  More details would be needed to complete the picture.

For one thing, God's kingdom will not just rule over the earth for one thousand years.  It will rule for eternity, and after the millennium and white throne judgment period it will rule over the universe forever.

Also, people need to be taught the difference between the kingdom of God and the nations ruled by the kingdom of God.  They are not the same, though it would be natural for people to confuse the two.  I used to get those confused.  But Mr. Armstrong correctly understood and taught the difference, and I learned from his writings.

When Christ returns, He and the saints will rule over all nations - all peoples.  We will rule over the Russian people, the Chinese people, the Japanese people - all peoples on earth.  And even after the great tribulation and the Day of the Lord, there will be millions of human beings living on the earth.

But will they be IN the kingdom of God?  Will they be part of the kingdom of God?  No.  They will be ruled by the kingdom of God.  They will be under the kingdom of God.  They themselves will not be part of that kingdom.  They will be ruled by the kingdom but not be in the kingdom.

Who will be in that kingdom?  Christ and the resurrected saints made immortal.  They will BE that kingdom.  Not the humans on earth that they rule over.

That is why the Bible teaches that flesh and blood cannot enter, or see, the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 15:50, John 3:3-8).

In other words, the kingdom of God itself will be the family of God, Christ and His bride the Church resurrected and changed to immortal spirit life.  And that is also part of the good news of the kingdom of God.

God is reproducing Himself in man and that is part of the gospel.  Mr. Armstrong taught, in Mystery of the Ages or The Incredible Human Potential that to do away with this truth is to do away with the gospel.  

In a sense, as Mr. Armstrong taught, the gospel of the kingdom of God is two-fold.  The kingdom of God is the government of God ruling over the earth and later the universe, and it is also the ruling family of God into which Christians can be born.  That ruling family of God will rule over all creation, so both aspects are tied together.  Both are good news.  Both are about the kingdom of God.

The kingdom of God will be the family of God into which Christians can be born.  God is reproducing Himself in mankind.  And that family of God will rule over the earth and the universe.  And it will bring peace and happiness to the earth.  Both aspects - the family of God and the government of God - are good news and both are about the kingdom.

But there is more.

Once you establish the core of the gospel message, that God through His family will rule the earth and the universe, there is much more information that will enrich that message and is properly part of it.  There is a lot of detail to add, just as a beautiful tree needs more than just a trunk to be healthy and beautiful.

To enter the kingdom of God, to be part of the ruling family of God, we have to be saved.  The salvation God offers us is the only way we can avoid the death penalty.  It is the only way we can enter that kingdom and be part of it.

And the opportunity for that salvation is part of why the message is good news!

Imagine Christ telling you, 2,000 years ago, "Someday after you are dead, God will establish His kingdom ruling over the nations and there will be great happiness over the whole earth.  But you won't be there and you will die forever because you have sinned and there will never be any opportunity for you to be saved".

Would you call that, "good news"?  I don't think so.  

Salvation is part of the true gospel.  It helps make it, "good news".  Salvation is not the trunk of the tree.  It is not the core of the gospel of the kingdom of God.  By itself, it is not the gospel, any more than a branch is a tree without the trunk.  But it adds important detail to the true gospel of the coming kingdom because it shows how we can be part of that kingdom.  That makes it part of the true gospel when combined with the government and family aspects of the kingdom of God.

And that salvation is made possible by the sacrifice and saving work of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ paid the penalty (or penalties, because there is more than one penalty for sin, not just the death penalty) for our sins so we can be forgiven and saved.  Is that part of the true gospel?  Yes, definitely, provided it is combined with the core message of the family of God ruling over the earth and the universe forever.  Salvation through Jesus Christ cannot stand alone.  If traditional churches teach that alone as the gospel, they are wrong.  

By itself, salvation through Christ is a false gospel.  But when combined with the core of the gospel, the family of God ruling as the government of God over the earth and the universe, it becomes a part of the true gospel.  It adds important detail and enriches the gospel message and becomes part of it.

What else is part of the gospel of the kingdom of God?  What about the law of God?  What about the two great commandments, the three weightier matters of the law (Matthew 23:23), and the ten commandments?  Is teaching about the law of God part of the gospel?

Yes, because it adds detail to the good news of the kingdom of God.  It teaches us the way of life that will be practiced in the kingdom of God that will make it joyous and happy.  It teaches us the way of life we should learn and practice so that we can be in that kingdom.  That is all part of the gospel.

What about repentance?  Is a call for repentance part of the true gospel of the kingdom of God?  Yes.  Repentance teaches us about the law of God and our need to obey it.  Consider this passage:  "Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, 'The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel' " (Mark 1:14-15).  Notice that repentance is preached as part of the gospel Jesus preached, for in preaching the gospel, Jesus said, repent.  At least that is how I understand this passage.  It was one message, the gospel, and it included repentance as part of the message.

Repentance is part of the good news of the kingdom of God because we have to repent to be in that kingdom, and because repentance teaches the way of life that will be practiced in the kingdom of God that will make it happy forever.

In its broadest sense everything in the Bible becomes part of the gospel!

Do you think that is an extreme statement?

History in the Bible teaches us what God has done in the past to prepare for the kingdom of God.  The law of God and all of God's instructions in Proverbs, in the epistles, in the gospel accounts, and everywhere in the Bible teach us the way of life we will live in the kingdom of God.  Salvation through Jesus Christ and all that includes - the suffering and death of Christ, faith, repentance, baptism, laying on of hands, receiving the Holy Spirit, and the resurrection at the return of Christ - is part of the good news of the kingdom because it shows us how we can enter the kingdom of God.  

Prophecy in the Bible - all prophecy - is part of the gospel because prophecy teaches us the steps God will take to prepare for and bring about that kingdom.

Everything about Jesus Christ is part of the good news of the kingdom of God because Jesus Christ will be the king of that kingdom.

What part of the Bible is not about history, prophecy, God's law and way of life, Jesus Christ the king of the kingdom, or salvation?  Show me, and I'll agree that that part of the Bible is not part of the gospel.

The whole Bible is about the kingdom of God one way or another.

But everything about Christ, everything about salvation, everything about God's way of life, everything about what God has done in the past or will do in the future to bring about the kingdom of God, everything about how we can enter the kingdom of God - is part of the true gospel IF THE CORE OF THE MESSAGE IS THE FAMILY OF GOD RULING AS THE GOVERNMENT OF GOD OVER THE EARTH AND THE UNIVERSE.

If you make the kingdom of God - the family of God as the government of God ruling the earth and the universe - the focus and core of the gospel message, then you can add all other knowledge and detail about that kingdom, and those details become part of the true gospel of the kingdom of God.

But if you neglect the family of God ruling as the government over the earth and the universe forever, then none of the other things is part of the true gospel.  They become part of this world's false gospel.

With the trunk of the tree, the attached branches and twigs are part of the tree and make it fruitful and beautiful.  But without the trunk, the branches and twigs are not a tree.  They are kindling and firewood, dead, dried up, rotting on the ground.

Do you disagree with that?

This world's Christianity preaches a false gospel.  They teach salvation through Christ.  They teach that He suffered and died so we can be saved.  Some of what they teach is true.  But even if everything they taught about salvation through Christ was true, it would still be a false gospel because they leave out the kingdom.  They don't talk about Christ returning to rule the earth with the saints.

But the Church of God is different.  We teach, as the core of our gospel message, the kingdom of God.  We teach that Christ will return and He, with the resurrected saints, will rule the earth and also the universe forever.  And with that as the core and focus of our gospel message, we also teach about Jesus Christ and many details from the Bible about that kingdom and how we can enter it, and all that becomes part of the gospel.

You can find places in the Bible where someone will preach the gospel of the kingdom and the things concerning Jesus Christ (Acts 8:12).  Does that word "and" mean that Jesus Christ is not part of the gospel of the kingdom?  No.  I do not think that is the intent of the writer.  He is simply saying that he taught the core of the good news of the kingdom and he included knowledge of Christ.  That is how he tells us the completeness of the message.

If the writer only said someone preached the gospel of the kingdom, the reader might wonder, but did he preach about Christ?  Was that included in the gospel he preached?  The writer makes it clear by saying, "and" the things concerning Christ.  In this context, the word "and" can mean "including".  Christ is still part of the gospel.  He will be king of the kingdom of God.  

Suppose I say, "I visited California and all the states of the United States".  You might not like the way I say that, but does that mean California is not part of the United States?

If you want an example of how broad the gospel can be - how all-inclusive - consider this passage.  After talking about how ancient Israel coming out of Egypt was unable to enter the promised land because of unbelief, the writer says,  "For indeed the gospel was preached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it" (Hebrews 4:2).  Now, did Moses tell Israel that God would set up a kingdom to rule over all the earth?  Did he teach them God was reproducing Himself in mankind?  I don't think so.  Yet, God calls what Moses taught them "the gospel", the same gospel that was preached to us.

But Moses taught them the law of God, the ten commandments, and that is part of the gospel because it teaches us the way of life that will be lived in the kingdom of God that will make life happy and joyous and make it truly good news.



Terminology vs. Substance


In any doctrinal question or dispute, it is useful to understand what is substance and what is terminology.

I am not sure how much of the controversy in the Church of God about what is the true gospel is substance and how much is terminology.  But we should think about it.

The substance is, what should we preach?  What should we teach?  We can agree that we should teach the core message about the kingdom of God.  We can agree that we should also teach about salvation through Jesus Christ.  So we agree on those things.  That is substance.

Do we call the part about salvation through Christ part of the "gospel"?  That is terminology.

And in this case, substance is more important than terminology.

What should we emphasize?  What should we put priority on?  Now we are getting into substance again.  Our teaching should emphasize the good news of the coming kingdom of God, Christ and the saints ruling over the nations of the world.  We should teach that and salvation through Christ - both.  But the greater emphasis should be on the government aspect.

This makes sense because the general public already knows a great deal about salvation through Christ, not perfectly, but they know.  We don't have to tell people Christ died for their sins.  But fewer people have heard the truth that Christ will return to rule the earth.  So it is fitting that we spend more time emphasizing the part they do not know.

And the people need this knowledge to have hope during the great tribulation and Day of the Lord that their suffering will end when Christ returns to bring peace and joy to the earth.

Share your thoughts in the comments.

 

What Does "Christ Is the Head of the Church" Mean?

Consider the following passages.  "And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence" (Colossians 1:18).  "For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body" (Ephesians 5:23).

Some leaders and ministers like to quote this as a way of bolstering faith and confidence of the members in the leadership of the Church and the ministry and their policies, doctrines, and decisions.

I heard one leader say, in reference to these passages, something like, who is the head of media operations?  Who is the head of church administration?  He mentioned various departments.  His implication was, since Christ is the head of the whole Church He is also the head of all these departments.  His further implication seemed to be, if you criticize those departments or their administrators, you are criticizing Christ.  Since Christ is the head of the Church, He is also the head of all those departments, and He leads their decisions.  If you disagree with their decisions, you are disagreeing with Christ.  

Is that what these passages mean?

Who is the head of church administration in a fellowship?  Who is the head of media operations in a fellowship?  Christ because He is head of the whole Church?  No.  Those are different offices.  The head of church administration is a man, not Christ.  It is a different office, a delegated office, an office that is delegated to a man who can sin or make mistakes and thus make bad decisions.  Christ may or may not allow those bad decisions for a time.  But to criticize bad decisions or bad policies or false doctrines that come from that office is not criticizing Christ.

The Bible says, in a multitude of counselors there is safety (Proverbs 11:14, Proverbs 24:6).  A leader should seek advice.  But how can those who give him advice tell him he is wrong if telling him he is wrong is criticizing Christ?

When Mr. Armstrong taught that Pentecost was on Monday, how could his advisers tell him he was wrong if disagreeing with Mr. Armstrong was disagreeing with Christ?

This may illustrate why saying Christ is head of the Church does not mean He is head of every department in the Church.  Who is the king of the universe?  Who has all authority over everything in heaven and earth?  God the father is king over the universe, and He has delegated all authority and power to Christ.  "And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, 'All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth' " (Matthew 28:18).

So you can say that God the Father is king over the universe, and you can also say that Christ is king over the universe since the Father delegates all authority to Christ.

Now, who is king over the earth right now?  Who is ruler of this evil world?  

"Then the devil, taking Him up on a high mountain, showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.  And the devil said to Him, 'All this authority I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish.  Therefore, if You will worship before me, all will be Yours' " (Luke 4:5-7).  

"I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming, and he has nothing in Me" (John 14:30).

"And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" (Ephesians 2:1-2).

"So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him" (Revelation 12:9).

Satan is still on the throne of the earth and will be until Christ returns.

Does the fact that Christ rules the universe mean that everything Satan does as ruler of this world is right and above criticism?  Of course not.  Christ allows Satan to make bad choices and decisions for now.

King of the earth is a delegated position, delegated to Satan.  Christ will take over that office in the future, but not yet.

Likewise, in the Church of God, there are delegated positions, offices that men hold, and Christ sometimes allows those men to make bad decisions.  It is not right to say or imply that Christ is head of those positions.  He is head over the whole Church, not each department.  Those are separate offices.  To disagree with the decision of a man is not necessarily disagreeing with Christ.

Yet some leaders of fellowships and ministers may use the argument that, since Christ is the head of the Church, to disagree with a man who holds an office in the Church is to disagree with Christ.  They may say, "Do you believe that Christ is the head of the Church or not?"

This is a false argument.

Look at recent Church history.  When the Church of God fell away from the truth after the death of Mr. Armstrong, Christ still was head of the Church, yet men holding offices in the Church made bad decisions and taught false doctrines.  To disagree with those doctrines and decisions was not disagreeing with Christ.  Christ allowed men to make those bad decisions, but those decisions were not from Christ.

The Bible also shows that God's servants make mistakes.

Consider this passage.  "Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.  Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master made ruler over his household, to give them food in due season?  Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find so doing.  Assuredly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all his goods.  But if that evil servant says in his heart, 'My master is delaying his coming,' and begins to beat his fellow servants, and to eat and drink with the drunkards, the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him and at an hour that he is not aware of, and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 24:44-51).  

Note, the one who sins in this passage is called a servant.  He is a servant of God and God is his master, but he is also called evil and will be condemned.  So even servants of God can sin.

Take it to the individual member level.  Who is the head of every man in the Church?  "But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God" (1 Corinthians 11:3).  Does that mean that every man always makes right decisions?  Does that mean that to criticize or disagree with any man in the Church is disagreeing with Christ because Christ is his head?

Is Christ your head?  If He is, does that mean that everything you do and say is above criticism because for someone to disagree with you means they are disagreeing with Christ?  Not always.

Also, note that the husband is head of the wife as Christ is head of the Church (Ephesians 5:22-24).  Now, does the fact that the husband is the head of the wife mean that the wife always obeys?  You men can answer that.  Likewise, because Christ is our head does not mean we always obey.

The important thing is, just because Christ leads us in a right way does not mean we follow Christ perfectly in that right way.  Christ leads, but we don't always follow where He leads.  We are imperfect.  We make mistakes.  We sin.

This goes for every rank in the Church, apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, local elders, and lay members.  None of us in this physical life can be trusted to always follow Christ perfectly.

Don't fall for the argument that every decision a leader in the Church makes is right because Christ is the head of the Church.  That is a false argument.

If you hear a leader of a fellowship or a minister say, "Do you believe that Christ is the head of the Church, or not?", that should be a red flag.  It should set off alarm bells in your mind.  What other cliches or metaphors can I use?

There is another problem here, and that is the use of the word, "church".

What do you mean?  Do you mean the whole Church of God, what some people call the greater Church of God?  It don't like that word "greater" in regard to all the divided Church of God fellowships.  Greater can mean bigger but it can also mean better, and I do not think all the scattered and divided fellowships are "better" than any one fellowship.  So I use the term, "whole Church of God".  What does that include?

I do not say that it includes every fellowship that calls itself "Church of God", or every member that counts himself a member of the Church of God.  It includes everyone, minister or member, who has the Holy Spirit dwelling in him or her (Romans 8:9).

So when a speaker or writer refers to Christ being the head of the Church, does he mean the whole Church of God?  Or does he mean only the one fellowship that speaker is part of?  That is not clarified.

When a leader of a fellowships says, Christ is the head of the Church, as a way of trying to get members to accept that leader's doctrines, does He mean Christ is the head of the whole Church of God including any members or leaders in other fellowships that have God's Holy Spirit, or does he mean just the one fellowship he leads?  This ambiguity is a rhetorical trick, I think.  If he means the whole Church of God, he is technically correct, but it can be said in a way that implies, in the minds of the listeners or readers, that it means just the one fellowship.

And notice, some of the very same leaders or ministers who like to say, Christ is the head of the Church, do not hesitate to criticize other Church of God fellowships or their doctrines.  Are they criticizing Christ?  Or do they think only their fellowship is the true Church?  They won't say that openly, but that may be what they imply.

It is like when a speaker says, we have wonderful unity in the Church.  What?  The whole Church of God is scattered into competing and divided fellowships.  That is not unity.  But he is talking about his own fellowship.  Yet, he calls it, "the Church", implying only his fellowship is the Church.

Another phrase ministers like to use is, "where Christ is working", as if Christ is only working in one place and with one fellowship.  That is nonsense.  They will say that we need to find out where Christ is working, or they will say we should have confidence in the decisions of the Church once we know where Christ is working.

There is no question that some fellowships and some people follow Christ more faithfully and more accurately than others.  Certainly we should try our best to seek out and support a fellowship that is more faithful than others.  But to say, "where Christ is working" implies that He only works in one place or through one man at a time.

That is a myth.

From the time I entered the Church I have heard members say, God only works through one man at a time.  But that is not what the Bible teaches.  God worked through Jeremiah and Ezekiel at the same time, did He not?  He worked through David and Nathan at the same time, using Nathan to rebuke David for his sin (2 Samuel 12:1-12).  He worked through Peter and Paul at the same time (Galatians 2:7-8).

Christ can work through many people at the same time, and each person has free moral agency to follow Christ fully, partly, or not at all.

Our faith must never be in the human leadership of the Church, but only in God and Christ.  We should follow men only as they follow Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1).

Believe God first.  Believe God and His word the Bible more than the Church.  If you disagree with the Church, do not discuss it with other members.  Do not create division.  Disagree quietly and wait for Christ to make the matter clear.  But put God and the Bible first, the Church and its traditions, leadership, and ministry second, in your mind, in your thinking, in your faith.

That is the principle of faith the Bible teaches.