A split is occurring in United Church of God centered around Mr. Leon Walker and the Latin American region of the church. It appears that UCG will lose some ministers and members, but how many is not clear. The situation is still evolving.
There are many details (and opinions) concerning the cause of the split and its progress, which those who are interested can find online (I will give some links below). But here is a brief summary.
Mr. Walker had communicated with several ministers in his area via email informing them about issues and sharing his opinion on those issues, issues which could affect how they vote in UCG. UCG headquarters became aware of that communication, which it did not like, and asked Mr. Walker to cancel a trip he had planned in Latin America and come to headquarters to discuss the matter. Mr. Walker declined, and headquarters fired him as regional director (or coordinator) for the Latin American region. However, Mr. Walker has stated that he intends to continue to supervise the Latin American region, and it appears that a large number of UCG ministers and members in Latin America, probably a majority, intend to support Mr. Walker in this controversy and accept his continued supervision. UCG is separately incorporated in Latin America, and according to a statement by Mr. Walker, he was made director of that area by Mr. Armstrong in 1979, and in July of 1995 he and the ministers under his supervision joined with UCG as a group, and he has supervised that area since.
Mr. Dennis Luker has given a sermon talking about government in UCG, in which he pleads for unity and warns those who do not cooperate with UCG headquarters.
There have been letters, posts, explanations, etc. on both sides. Here are some links for those who are interested:
COGwriter blog (Robert Thiel):
http://www.cogwriter.com/news/cog-news/ucg-not-united-in-latin-america/
Inside United: Realtime (an official UCG blog) - earliest posts are listed first:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/changes-in-latin-american-administration/
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/mario-seiglie-gives-update-from-chile/
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/seiglie-mario-da-actualizacion-desde-chile/ (Spanish language)
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/member-letter-from-dennis-luker/
(contains a link to a .pdf file that gives more detail)
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/dennis-luker-presidente-carta/
(Spanish language)
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/07/03/luker-sermon-link/
You can find a link to the sermon given by Mr. Luker here:
http://members.ucg.org/content/jesus-christ-head-church
UCG Current Crisis blog - contains some posts by Mr. Walker explaining his side:
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4180272-letter-from-the-latin-ministry-to-the-coe
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4091850-letter-to-the-council-regarding-the-removal-of-mr-walker-as-spanish-director
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4092830-reply-from-the-coe-to-the-latin-elders-and-administration
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4132204-mr-walker-s-reply-to-the-accusation-of-orchestrating-block-voting-
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4176364-mr-walkers-reply-to-mario-seiglie-s-update-from-chile
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4177976-email-mr-walker-to-mr-luker-attached-letter-is-posted-above-
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4178073-letter-from-mr-walker-to-mr-luker
http://ucgcurrentcrisis.webs.com/apps/blog/show/4198725-leon-walker-response-to-the-background-to-the-situation-with-leon-walker-and-latin-america-
The Shining Light blog - posts below give information and opinion about events in UCG:
http://theshininglight.info/?p=214
http://theshininglight.info/?p=219
http://theshininglight.info/?p=224
http://theshininglight.info/?p=242
http://theshininglight.info/?p=252
http://theshininglight.info/?p=256
http://theshininglight.info/?p=259
It is easy to get bogged down in the details of the accusations, defenses against accusations, and counter-accusations that fly around.
It is not a surprise that there is a split, but what has caught me a little by surprise is how fast it is happening.
It still has not been made apparent what the core issues that divide the two camps in UCG are. It cannot just be personalities and positions. I do not believe that the ministry in UCG would be so carnal as to be split like this without some substantive issues at stake, even if those issues are not visibly on the table for the general membership yet.
There have been some hints, but I won't comment till I find something more substantial.
I have listened carefully to Mr. Luker's sermon. Towards the end he talks a little bit about UCG's efforts to preach the truth to the public, and he seems very enthusiastic. Assuming his zeal is real, I appreciate it. As I point out in my book, Preaching the Gospel, there is a tremendous need for the Church to get a warning message to our nations before the tribulation begins, and I rejoice whenever any Church of God group makes the effort to do that.
To be successful, the TV program and literature must be strong and hard-hitting, must "cry aloud" and must tell the people of this country their sins, and must warn them of the punishment that is coming if we do not repent as a nation. To do this, it must teach the viewers our identity as part of the children of Israel and how Bible prophecy shows that the great tribulation will come primarily on the English-speaking nations in the lifetimes of most people alive today. We must not pull our punches and try to preach a soft message, something smooth, that will be agreeable to most viewers. If we do that, our message will be useless as a warning.
Moreover, to be successful, there must be consistency between what we preach and what we practice. We need to practice what we preach so that God will bless our efforts. We must practice what we preach so viewers will find our message credible and our practices will not be a stumbling block for our message. Part of the message must include the good news of the soon-coming return of Jesus Christ to replace all the man-devised governments of this world with God's government over all the earth. But how can we say that it is "good news" that the various forms of man's government on the earth will be abolished, including the democracies of this world, if we hold to one of those forms of government in the Church?
After Christ returns, elections and voting will be abolished. Why should UCG practice a form of government that will be abolished by Christ, and then tell the world it will be "good news" when Christ abolishes that form of government?
Much of the sermon is a defense of UCG's system of governance, but not much is from the Bible. I will have more to say about that in future posts.
Mr. Luker in his sermon implied that he is prepared to take strong action against ministers who will not accept the form of governance as it stands right now and accept the authority of the present Council of Elders and work with him and the Council to bring unity in the Church, and suggested a peaceful separation for those who cannot do that.
The separation of Mr. Leon Walker from the authority of UCG headquarters may be only the beginning of the leaving of many other ministers before next Passover.
More to follow...
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
God's 7,000 Year Plan -- Are We in the Last Days?, Chapter 1
The Feast of Tabernacles - the Millennial Rule of Christ, Chapter 2
The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3
Why the Gospel Must Still Be Preached to the World, Chapter 4
Practicing What We Preach, Chapter 6
Friday, July 9, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Lessons from Jonah and Roy Holladay Post
Mr. Roy Holladay of United Church of God posted about lessons from the book of Jonah regarding the Church's work of preaching the gospel and a warning message to the public. You can read his post here:
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/pre-sabbath-letter-to-brethren-from-roy-holladay/
I thought the post is good, and it helps to show why the Church of God needs to have zeal for preaching the gospel to the world and the Ezekiel warning to Israel.
God planned a punishment for Nineveh, but was determined that Nineveh would have a warning first, and sent Jonah to deliver the warning. Jonah refused at first, but God was determined to give Nineveh a warning before He punished them. God made sure that the warning was delivered, and Nineveh BELIEVED the message and repented, so God withheld the punishment He had planned for them (Jonah chapters 1 through 3).
Why was God determined to get a warning message out to Nineveh? The answer becomes clear in Jonah 4:11: "And should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left—and much livestock?"
God's motive was love. He loved the people of Nineveh. Jonah didn't, but God did.
God hasn't changed. He is still a God of love. That is why God wants a warning message to go out to all Israel in our time. And if we love God and love our neighbors, we should be filled with zeal to get that message out to the nations who need to hear it.
"You shall love your neigbhor as yourself," is one of the two great commandments (Leviticus 19:17-19, Matthew 22:37-40, Mark 12:29-31). An application of this law is given in Proverbs 24:11: "Deliver those who are drawn toward death, and hold back those stumbling to the slaughter." The only way we can save and "hold back" those in our nations who are stumbling to the slaughter because of their sins is to warn them.
Teaching is an act of love, an act of kindness and mercy. When John the Baptist questioned if Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus told John's disciples to tell John, "The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up and the poor have the gospel preached to them" (Matthew 11:5). What does preaching the gospel to the poor have in common with healing the blind, the lame, the deaf, and the lepers, and raising the dead? They are all acts of mercy and compassion.
One of the applications of God's law of love is that we do to others as we want done to us: "Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 7:12). Do we want to be warned and taught? Are we glad that God warned us and preached the gospel to us through the sacrifices of others before us so we can know the truth? Are we glad to have the truth we have because of Mr. Armstrong's zeal and the zeal of the membership of the Church of God in Mr. Armstrong's day, to get the gospel out over radio, TV, and magazine publishing? If so, we should likewise sacrifice so others can have that same truth. But if not, if we do not appreciate God's truth, God is able to take it from us.
Suppose you were driving on a dark, winding road. There is a stalled car up ahead, and it could cause an accident. Would you not want someone to put up flares so you can be warned and slow down and avoid a crash that might injure or kill you and your loved ones? Would the person putting up the flares be showing love to you, his neighbor? Or suppose you live in an apartment and the building is on fire while you are sleeping. Would you not want someone to knock on the door to warn you and your family to get out?
Giving a warning to those who need it is an act of love.
Notice Jesus' compassion towards the crowds, and how He expressed that compassion: "And Jesus, when He came out, saw a great multitude and was moved with compassion for them, because they were like sheep not having a shepherd. So He began to teach them many things" (Mark 6:34). Jesus expressed love and compassion towards the people by teaching them.
Preaching the gospel to the world as a witness, giving the Ezekiel warning, "public proclamation" as it is called, is an expression of love towards our neighbors and a fulfilling of the second great commandment.
But it also shows love towards God.
Giving a warning message to all Israel before the tribulation begins glorifies God's name because it demonstrates His fairness in giving a warning while there is still time to repent. As I point out in my website, Preaching the Gospel, when the tribulation begins, our people will not be able to blame God, saying, "we never had a warning." They will remember our message, and they will know that God was fair to give them a warning, which they did not heed. That will make it easier for them to accept responsibility, saying, "I should have listened," rather than blame God, saying, "I never had a chance." Accepting responsibility for their choices is a first step towards repentance.
In chapter four of my book, I give many quotes of Holocaust survivors who went through the Nazi concentration camps, and in many cases those who believed in God lost faith in God because they could not understand why God would allow it. Our people could react the same way in the tribulation if they do not hear a message explaining what will happen, why it will happen, and what they need to do.
The Church of God needs to be on fire with zeal, motivated by love towards God and love towards neighbor, to make sacrifices and to go all out to preach God's truth to the public. In this matter, Mr. Holladay is right.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Responsibility of a Watchman, Chapter 3
The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3
Why the Gospel Must Still Be Preached to the World, Chapter 4
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
The Effect of the Holocaust, Chapter 4
The Two Witnesses and God's Fairness, Chapter 4
http://realtimeunited.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/pre-sabbath-letter-to-brethren-from-roy-holladay/
I thought the post is good, and it helps to show why the Church of God needs to have zeal for preaching the gospel to the world and the Ezekiel warning to Israel.
God planned a punishment for Nineveh, but was determined that Nineveh would have a warning first, and sent Jonah to deliver the warning. Jonah refused at first, but God was determined to give Nineveh a warning before He punished them. God made sure that the warning was delivered, and Nineveh BELIEVED the message and repented, so God withheld the punishment He had planned for them (Jonah chapters 1 through 3).
Why was God determined to get a warning message out to Nineveh? The answer becomes clear in Jonah 4:11: "And should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left—and much livestock?"
God's motive was love. He loved the people of Nineveh. Jonah didn't, but God did.
God hasn't changed. He is still a God of love. That is why God wants a warning message to go out to all Israel in our time. And if we love God and love our neighbors, we should be filled with zeal to get that message out to the nations who need to hear it.
"You shall love your neigbhor as yourself," is one of the two great commandments (Leviticus 19:17-19, Matthew 22:37-40, Mark 12:29-31). An application of this law is given in Proverbs 24:11: "Deliver those who are drawn toward death, and hold back those stumbling to the slaughter." The only way we can save and "hold back" those in our nations who are stumbling to the slaughter because of their sins is to warn them.
Teaching is an act of love, an act of kindness and mercy. When John the Baptist questioned if Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus told John's disciples to tell John, "The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up and the poor have the gospel preached to them" (Matthew 11:5). What does preaching the gospel to the poor have in common with healing the blind, the lame, the deaf, and the lepers, and raising the dead? They are all acts of mercy and compassion.
One of the applications of God's law of love is that we do to others as we want done to us: "Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 7:12). Do we want to be warned and taught? Are we glad that God warned us and preached the gospel to us through the sacrifices of others before us so we can know the truth? Are we glad to have the truth we have because of Mr. Armstrong's zeal and the zeal of the membership of the Church of God in Mr. Armstrong's day, to get the gospel out over radio, TV, and magazine publishing? If so, we should likewise sacrifice so others can have that same truth. But if not, if we do not appreciate God's truth, God is able to take it from us.
Suppose you were driving on a dark, winding road. There is a stalled car up ahead, and it could cause an accident. Would you not want someone to put up flares so you can be warned and slow down and avoid a crash that might injure or kill you and your loved ones? Would the person putting up the flares be showing love to you, his neighbor? Or suppose you live in an apartment and the building is on fire while you are sleeping. Would you not want someone to knock on the door to warn you and your family to get out?
Giving a warning to those who need it is an act of love.
Notice Jesus' compassion towards the crowds, and how He expressed that compassion: "And Jesus, when He came out, saw a great multitude and was moved with compassion for them, because they were like sheep not having a shepherd. So He began to teach them many things" (Mark 6:34). Jesus expressed love and compassion towards the people by teaching them.
Preaching the gospel to the world as a witness, giving the Ezekiel warning, "public proclamation" as it is called, is an expression of love towards our neighbors and a fulfilling of the second great commandment.
But it also shows love towards God.
Giving a warning message to all Israel before the tribulation begins glorifies God's name because it demonstrates His fairness in giving a warning while there is still time to repent. As I point out in my website, Preaching the Gospel, when the tribulation begins, our people will not be able to blame God, saying, "we never had a warning." They will remember our message, and they will know that God was fair to give them a warning, which they did not heed. That will make it easier for them to accept responsibility, saying, "I should have listened," rather than blame God, saying, "I never had a chance." Accepting responsibility for their choices is a first step towards repentance.
In chapter four of my book, I give many quotes of Holocaust survivors who went through the Nazi concentration camps, and in many cases those who believed in God lost faith in God because they could not understand why God would allow it. Our people could react the same way in the tribulation if they do not hear a message explaining what will happen, why it will happen, and what they need to do.
The Church of God needs to be on fire with zeal, motivated by love towards God and love towards neighbor, to make sacrifices and to go all out to preach God's truth to the public. In this matter, Mr. Holladay is right.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Responsibility of a Watchman, Chapter 3
The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3
Why the Gospel Must Still Be Preached to the World, Chapter 4
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
The Effect of the Holocaust, Chapter 4
The Two Witnesses and God's Fairness, Chapter 4
Sunday, April 18, 2010
The Replacement of UCG's President Clyde Kilough
The ruling Council of Elders (COE) of United Church of God an International Association (UCG) has requested and received the resignation of the president of the UCG, Clyde Kilough. He has been replaced as president by the chairman of the COE, Roy Holladay, who will serve as interim president until a new president is appointed by the Council. Several other men holding administrative positions have also resigned, including Jim Franks and Larry Salyer, who are replaced on an interim basis by Victor Kubik and Peter Eddington respectively. Letters from Mr. Holladay explaining these changes can be found at the UCG members site. Portions of letters may also be found at Robert Thiel's COGwriter blog.
This is not unexpected. There has been a power shift going on in UCG between two opposing camps. As those familiar with UCG governance and politics know, the 12-man Council of Elders is elected by the vote of the General Conference of Elders (GCE), which is the collective body of about 500 ordained ministers in UCG. In recent elections, the GCE has replaced those who have held power and influence on the Council of Elders for a long time with new council members who have different priorities and perspectives than the men they replaced. The 500 man General Conference of Elders has been approximately evenly divided in their support for the two camps with a thin majority for the new men who have taken control.
It is not hard to find out, from various blogs and communications, which leaders are aligned with which camps. The divisions seem fairly sharp, and it seems there have been feelings of bitterness and hostility, which prompted a letter December 28 from the Council to the general ministry pleading for a spirit of unity, and warning of the danger of a spirit of division within the UCG ministry.
What is harder to determine are the exact issues that divide the two camps. Those issues have never been openly acknowledged to the membership and the the Church of God as a whole.
One issue was the proposed move of headquarters to Dallas. First the decision was made to move to Dallas, and then, after money was spent preparing for that move, the decision was reversed.
But I find it hard to believe that was the only, or even the primary, issue.
Is it the priority given and money spent on preaching the gospel to the public? Is it a matter of how tightly local congregations and pastors are controlled from headquarters? Is it cooperation with other Church of God fellowships? Is it possible doctrinal change, such as a change in the doctrine that the United States and other western nations are descended from the lost ten tribes of Israel, or some other doctrine? No one I found is open and clear about exactly what issues divide the two camps. This is not just a matter of personalities.
But while the issues that are the focus of the current divisions are not clear, the REASON for the spirit of division that exists is clear. And it goes back to the start of UCG as a church in 1995.
Herbert W. Armstrong began to fellowship with the Church of God Seventh Day around the time of his conversion in 1927. While still a lay member, he wrote up papers proposing changes to doctrine based on his independent research in the Bible, and sent those papers to the COG7D leadership, including a paper on the identity of Israel. The leadership of that church never accepted the new doctrines Mr. Armstrong discovered in the Bible. Eventually, Mr. Armstrong and the COG7D parted company, and around early 1934 Mr. Armstrong started a work that led to the formation of the Worldwide Church of God, which he led till his death in 1986.
Mr. Armstrong taught God's government in the Church from the top-down, what some would call "one-man rule". Mr. Armstrong did not report to a ruling board of men or any body of men who vote, or "ballot", to select a leader. Mr. Armstrong understood, from the Bible, that democracy, the selection of the leadership by those under the authority of the leadership, is not God's way. He understood that he personally was responsible to and under the authority of Jesus Christ, not any group of men. This was an important doctrine to Mr. Armstrong.
So when he was ill and knew his death was near, he did not leave the selection of a replacement to a voting board of men, but in the name of and by the authority of Jesus Christ appointed Joseph Tkach to succeed him as Pastor General of the Church.
During the decade that followed, Mr. Tkach changed most of the important doctrines of Worldwide. Those who remained faithful to the doctrines taught from the Bible by Mr. Armstrong left Worldwide at various times and formed a multitude of fellowships, with almost all, except one, following Mr. Armstrong's judgment that right Church governance is from the top down.
United Church of God was organized by a number of leading ministers, including David Hulme and Roy Holladay, in the spring of 1995.
Here is what Mr. Holladay wrote in his April 13 letter explaining the recent changes: "As collectively established in the beginning of our fellowship 15 years ago, the Council of Elders is directly and solely responsible for oversight and setting direction and policy for the Church. This is quite a different structure from the one we experienced in our former church affiliation where only one or two people at the top made all of the important decisions. We learned through painful experience where that led. The United Church of God, we collectively decided, would be different. We adopted as one of our primary governing principles Proverbs:24:6: 'In a multitude of counselors there is safety.'
"To put in perspective the now-past situation, allow me to review a few more points of important history. Fifteen years ago we collectively chose a very different structure of governance on the physical level, emphasizing and recognizing of course that the living Head of the spiritual Church is Jesus Christ Himself. The highest authority in our physical organization is the General Conference of Elders, which is all of the nearly 500 elders of the United Church of God who choose to participate."
Mr. Holladay quotes Proverbs 24:6, but it is misapplied if it is used to justify placing authority in the hands of 500 voting ministers. Proverbs 24:6 has to do with the giving of advice, not a matter of authority. Mr. Armstrong used the principle properly when he would get advice from those under him before making a decision. But always the authority for the decision came from Christ through Mr. Armstrong, not through the men who advised Mr. Armstrong.
What was the "painful experience" Mr. Holladay referred to which led to their decision to overturn Mr. Armstrong's judgment that government in the Church must be from the top down and not by the voting of men? It was the division and scattering of the Church of God caused by the doctrinal changes made by Mr. Tkach. It was Mr. Tkach's authority over Worldwide, the authority of one man not restrained by any council or board that could vote him out of office, that gave him the power to make massive doctrinal change, change not supported by most of the ministry and members, in only ten years.
In order to avoid that kind of thing repeating itself, UCG ministry wanted a system of checks and balances so that no one man had the power to make doctrinal changes without the approval of most of the ministry. So they set up governance with the whole body of ministers having the authority to select, by voting (or "balloting"), a 12-man governing board. That board would then select a management team led by a president.
The idea was that the vesting of power in the hands of the whole ministry would prevent doctrinal heresy that could divide and scatter the church once again.
But there are several problems with that approach.
First of all, democracy will not prevent the introduction of unbiblical doctrine, it only slows it down. This can be seen in other church organizations that are governed by the voting of men. It may become apparent in UCG as time goes on.
Secondly, while making doctrine subject to the will of the entire ministry may make it harder for any man to introduce false doctrine, it also makes it harder for correction to doctrine and new knowledge to be taught from the Bible. The UCG ministry likes to look at what happened from 1986 to 1995, when the principle doctrines taught by Mr. Armstrong were overturned, but they do not look at how those doctrines came to be in the first place. Mr. Armstrong was able to discover those doctrines in the Bible and teach them to the Church precisely because he reported directly to Christ and not to a voting board. Had he stayed with Church of God Seventh Day, we would not have those doctrines (unless God used someone else). Had those doctrines been subject to the voting of men, we would not have them today.
Thirdly, as I point out in my December 19 and January 1 postings in this blog, democracy is a guarenteed recipe for division. You cannot separate the two. I said above that the reason for the spirit of division that exists in UCG is clear. It is a direct effect of rule by ballot. You will ALWAYS have division, eventually, if rule is by ballot.
Why?
For one thing, the whole issue of authority is confused. Who is in charge? Does the 12-man board govern the 500 ministers, or do the 500 ministers govern the 12-man board? If someone asked me, I would have said the 12-man board is the highest authority, but Mr. Holladay in his letter said, "The highest authority in our physical organization is the General Conference of Elders, which is all of the nearly 500 elders of the United Church of God who choose to participate." (By the way, the reason not all elders "choose to participate" is probably that some of them have a conscience problem with voting, knowing that it is wrong according to the Bible.)
The 12-man Council of Elders governs the 500 ministers, but the 500 ministers are the "highest authority" over the 12-man board. Does this sound like "self-government"? Do the members of the 12-man board report to Christ or to the 500 ministers who vote them into office? Is there a conflict of interest here?
When UCG started, some said it was governed by a "Spirit-led consensus". I suppose they meant that God led the 500 ministers to vote for the right members of the Council of Elders and to approve the right proposals that the ministry votes on. But if that is the case, why would God lead UCG to spend money on a move to Dallas, then cancel the move? And why is the GCE so evenly divided in their voting?
But as I point out in my previous blog postings about four months ago, there is another reason, the most important reason, why balloting MUST lead to division and will ALWAYS lead to division.
Proverbs:24:6 teaches us to get counsel from others before making a decision whenever possible. The 500 ministers who vote must be able to freely discuss their differences, not only differences among themselves, but differences between themselves and those holding elected office. They must be free to criticize, and WILL criticize, the men they elect. But this very criticism weakens those in authority and causes division.
It becomes a vicious cycle.
And the whole Church of God is watching this play out in UCG.
A fourth problem with UCG's governance is that they made the decision to overturn Mr. Armstrong's judgment based on human observation rather than God's Word.
As anyone knows who is familiar with my writings in my book, Preaching the Gospel, I do not say that Mr. Armstrong's teachings cannot be changed. Mr. Armstrong himself corrected his own doctrines when he saw by the Bible that they were wrong, and he would have us do the same, I am sure. But before changing a doctrine or judgment Mr. Armstrong taught based on the Bible, the Church should do a thorough Bible study on the subject and prove from the Bible whether that doctrine is right or wrong. And only after proving from the Bible that the doctrine or judgment is wrong or has no basis in the Bible should the doctrine be changed.
UCG has never done that with the doctrine of government from the top down. There is no record or authorization in the Bible that indicates that God rules through the voting of men. If you know of any, show it to me. Acts 1:15-26 is NOT an example of voting, as I point out in my book.
The decision on governance in 1995 was made based on human reason and observation, not the Bible.
It boils down to how to determine truth. That controversy has been going on since Lucifer disbelieved God and chose to experiment for himself with vanity to see if it brought him greater happiness. God must have warned Lucifer, and all the angels, of the dangers of sin, BEFORE Lucifer sinned. And if Lucifer committed the first sin, then there was no one to tempt him, so he didn't sin from personal weakness. I don't think Lucifer deliberately chose a path that would bring him long term misery. But he didn't believe God's warnings. He probably wanted to see for himself, to experiment, if thoughts of vanity and self-exaltation would make him happier.
So rather than trust God to tell the truth and to lead him in the way that produces happiness, Lucifer chose the method of experimentation, observation, and interpretation of results. After he sinned, he became Satan, the Devil.
He taught that same method to Adam and Eve. Eve SAW the fruit (Genesis 3:6). She observed that it was good for food and pleasant to the eyes, just as UCG leaders observed that Mr. Tkach used his one-man authority to make massive doctrinal changes. She interpreted what she saw, just as UCG leaders interpreted what they saw happen in Worldwide to mean that government should not be from the top down, but there should be a system of balloting to prevent any one man from becoming too powerful. And Eve disbelieved God, just as UCG leaders did not trust God's teaching about government in the Bible.
Solomon was another man who experimented. You can read of how he experimented, and observed, and interpreted, in the book of Ecclesiastes. See Ecclesiastes 2:1-11. But his experimenting did not bring him happiness, but frustration and depression, as you can read in the whole book of Ecclesiastes, and he also became unfaithful to God (1 Kings 11:1-13). Contrast this with the example of Abraham, who believed what God told him even when it was contrary to what he observed (Romans 4:3, James 2:23, Genesis 15:4-6).
Today, one of the greatest controversies in the United States is the evolution-vs-creation controversy. I have debated this issue in many blogs and forums, and those who are hard-core atheists and evolutionists will not accept any idea or knowledge that cannot be verified by the scientific method of experimentation, observation, and interpretation of results. For them, the scientific method is not just the best path to truth, but the ONLY path to truth.
But God's method for us to learn truth is to trust His wisdom and integrity enough to believe and obey what He says. As we believe and obey Him, he gives us more wisdom to understand His will and the Bible so we can believe and obey Him more.
The apostles Peter and Paul did not depend on the voting of men for their appointments. You will not find a single example in the Bible of God's authority flowing through the voting of men. Democracy is one of Satan's forms of government, and you can see the results of it in the division and steady weakening of the United States. And it should be obvious that there will be no balloting in the Kingdom of God.
Did God lead Mr. Armstrong to name Mr. Tkach, and if so, why? I answer those questions in chapter 5 of my book.
God Himself is performing an experiment for all mankind. This is not an experiment for God to learn what is true. It is a demonstration experiment, to teach mankind what God already knows is true. It is like experiments in high school chemistry labs, where the students perform a text-book experiment so they can see what happens, but the writers of the textbooks already know the results.
The seven thousand year plan of God is a demonstration to show mankind that man cannot govern himself, and that God's way works best. For six thousand years, mankind has been following the pattern set by Adam and Eve, and set by Satan before that, of learning by experimentation and observation, and then interpreting the results to decide for oneself what is best. But God's way is different. God reveals by His Word, APART from experimentation and observation, what is best, and He commands us to believe Him. Mankind is writing the lesson in death and suffering that the scientific method, when used as a substitute for God's revelation, does not bring long-term good.
I think the same thing is happening in UCG. When God scattered the Church of God for our Laodicean attitude, He allowed one major fellowship to practice governance by the voting of men. I think that just as He is allowing Satan to rule this world for 6,000 years to demonstrate that Satan's way does not work, so He is allowing one major fellowship to govern itself by the voting of men to demonstrate once and for all that democracy does not work, that it causes division, and that it does not prevent doctrinal error.
What is happening in UCG is a mirror-image of what is happening in the United States Congress. They are both the same system, and as our political divisions are weakening our country, so the political divisions in UCG are weakening the Church.
But we must be different if we are to learn the way of life we will practice in the Kingdom on God.
The issue of governance by ballot vs. government from the top down is not going to go away. Government was top down under Mr. Armstrong, and it is because of that top down government that UCG has most of the doctrines that it has. And since 1995, it has been trying to preserve those doctrines by abandoning the principle of government that made those doctrines possible and which is taught in the Bible. It won't work. There is an inconsistancy here, I think what someone in Worldwide once called "cognitive dissonance". You can ignore it, sweep it under the rug, pretend you can solve UCG's problems by appealing to the members and ministry for love and unity, but it won't work. When the foundation is cracked, you cannot solve the problems by patching the building. You have to start over organizationally, from the bottom up, no matter how painful that will be. It will be painful, because it involves admitting to a 15-year mistake, which most people are not willing to do.
I have no doubt that some in United Church of God will do this, and others will not. That is part of the testing process that God is putting the whole Church of God through since the death of Mr. Armstrong.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
A Lesson from the Autobiography, Chapter 6
A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5
Finding the Solution, Chapter 5
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
The Inconsistencies of Saying We Can't Change Herbert W. Armstrong's Doctrine, Chapter 6
Faith, Chapter 6
Evolution versus the Creation Account in Genesis, Chapter 1
Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1
God's 7,000 Year Plan -- Are We in the Last Days?, Chapter 1
The Feast of Tabernacles - the Millennial Rule of Christ, Chapter 2
This is not unexpected. There has been a power shift going on in UCG between two opposing camps. As those familiar with UCG governance and politics know, the 12-man Council of Elders is elected by the vote of the General Conference of Elders (GCE), which is the collective body of about 500 ordained ministers in UCG. In recent elections, the GCE has replaced those who have held power and influence on the Council of Elders for a long time with new council members who have different priorities and perspectives than the men they replaced. The 500 man General Conference of Elders has been approximately evenly divided in their support for the two camps with a thin majority for the new men who have taken control.
It is not hard to find out, from various blogs and communications, which leaders are aligned with which camps. The divisions seem fairly sharp, and it seems there have been feelings of bitterness and hostility, which prompted a letter December 28 from the Council to the general ministry pleading for a spirit of unity, and warning of the danger of a spirit of division within the UCG ministry.
What is harder to determine are the exact issues that divide the two camps. Those issues have never been openly acknowledged to the membership and the the Church of God as a whole.
One issue was the proposed move of headquarters to Dallas. First the decision was made to move to Dallas, and then, after money was spent preparing for that move, the decision was reversed.
But I find it hard to believe that was the only, or even the primary, issue.
Is it the priority given and money spent on preaching the gospel to the public? Is it a matter of how tightly local congregations and pastors are controlled from headquarters? Is it cooperation with other Church of God fellowships? Is it possible doctrinal change, such as a change in the doctrine that the United States and other western nations are descended from the lost ten tribes of Israel, or some other doctrine? No one I found is open and clear about exactly what issues divide the two camps. This is not just a matter of personalities.
But while the issues that are the focus of the current divisions are not clear, the REASON for the spirit of division that exists is clear. And it goes back to the start of UCG as a church in 1995.
Herbert W. Armstrong began to fellowship with the Church of God Seventh Day around the time of his conversion in 1927. While still a lay member, he wrote up papers proposing changes to doctrine based on his independent research in the Bible, and sent those papers to the COG7D leadership, including a paper on the identity of Israel. The leadership of that church never accepted the new doctrines Mr. Armstrong discovered in the Bible. Eventually, Mr. Armstrong and the COG7D parted company, and around early 1934 Mr. Armstrong started a work that led to the formation of the Worldwide Church of God, which he led till his death in 1986.
Mr. Armstrong taught God's government in the Church from the top-down, what some would call "one-man rule". Mr. Armstrong did not report to a ruling board of men or any body of men who vote, or "ballot", to select a leader. Mr. Armstrong understood, from the Bible, that democracy, the selection of the leadership by those under the authority of the leadership, is not God's way. He understood that he personally was responsible to and under the authority of Jesus Christ, not any group of men. This was an important doctrine to Mr. Armstrong.
So when he was ill and knew his death was near, he did not leave the selection of a replacement to a voting board of men, but in the name of and by the authority of Jesus Christ appointed Joseph Tkach to succeed him as Pastor General of the Church.
During the decade that followed, Mr. Tkach changed most of the important doctrines of Worldwide. Those who remained faithful to the doctrines taught from the Bible by Mr. Armstrong left Worldwide at various times and formed a multitude of fellowships, with almost all, except one, following Mr. Armstrong's judgment that right Church governance is from the top down.
United Church of God was organized by a number of leading ministers, including David Hulme and Roy Holladay, in the spring of 1995.
Here is what Mr. Holladay wrote in his April 13 letter explaining the recent changes: "As collectively established in the beginning of our fellowship 15 years ago, the Council of Elders is directly and solely responsible for oversight and setting direction and policy for the Church. This is quite a different structure from the one we experienced in our former church affiliation where only one or two people at the top made all of the important decisions. We learned through painful experience where that led. The United Church of God, we collectively decided, would be different. We adopted as one of our primary governing principles Proverbs:24:6: 'In a multitude of counselors there is safety.'
"To put in perspective the now-past situation, allow me to review a few more points of important history. Fifteen years ago we collectively chose a very different structure of governance on the physical level, emphasizing and recognizing of course that the living Head of the spiritual Church is Jesus Christ Himself. The highest authority in our physical organization is the General Conference of Elders, which is all of the nearly 500 elders of the United Church of God who choose to participate."
Mr. Holladay quotes Proverbs 24:6, but it is misapplied if it is used to justify placing authority in the hands of 500 voting ministers. Proverbs 24:6 has to do with the giving of advice, not a matter of authority. Mr. Armstrong used the principle properly when he would get advice from those under him before making a decision. But always the authority for the decision came from Christ through Mr. Armstrong, not through the men who advised Mr. Armstrong.
What was the "painful experience" Mr. Holladay referred to which led to their decision to overturn Mr. Armstrong's judgment that government in the Church must be from the top down and not by the voting of men? It was the division and scattering of the Church of God caused by the doctrinal changes made by Mr. Tkach. It was Mr. Tkach's authority over Worldwide, the authority of one man not restrained by any council or board that could vote him out of office, that gave him the power to make massive doctrinal change, change not supported by most of the ministry and members, in only ten years.
In order to avoid that kind of thing repeating itself, UCG ministry wanted a system of checks and balances so that no one man had the power to make doctrinal changes without the approval of most of the ministry. So they set up governance with the whole body of ministers having the authority to select, by voting (or "balloting"), a 12-man governing board. That board would then select a management team led by a president.
The idea was that the vesting of power in the hands of the whole ministry would prevent doctrinal heresy that could divide and scatter the church once again.
But there are several problems with that approach.
First of all, democracy will not prevent the introduction of unbiblical doctrine, it only slows it down. This can be seen in other church organizations that are governed by the voting of men. It may become apparent in UCG as time goes on.
Secondly, while making doctrine subject to the will of the entire ministry may make it harder for any man to introduce false doctrine, it also makes it harder for correction to doctrine and new knowledge to be taught from the Bible. The UCG ministry likes to look at what happened from 1986 to 1995, when the principle doctrines taught by Mr. Armstrong were overturned, but they do not look at how those doctrines came to be in the first place. Mr. Armstrong was able to discover those doctrines in the Bible and teach them to the Church precisely because he reported directly to Christ and not to a voting board. Had he stayed with Church of God Seventh Day, we would not have those doctrines (unless God used someone else). Had those doctrines been subject to the voting of men, we would not have them today.
Thirdly, as I point out in my December 19 and January 1 postings in this blog, democracy is a guarenteed recipe for division. You cannot separate the two. I said above that the reason for the spirit of division that exists in UCG is clear. It is a direct effect of rule by ballot. You will ALWAYS have division, eventually, if rule is by ballot.
Why?
For one thing, the whole issue of authority is confused. Who is in charge? Does the 12-man board govern the 500 ministers, or do the 500 ministers govern the 12-man board? If someone asked me, I would have said the 12-man board is the highest authority, but Mr. Holladay in his letter said, "The highest authority in our physical organization is the General Conference of Elders, which is all of the nearly 500 elders of the United Church of God who choose to participate." (By the way, the reason not all elders "choose to participate" is probably that some of them have a conscience problem with voting, knowing that it is wrong according to the Bible.)
The 12-man Council of Elders governs the 500 ministers, but the 500 ministers are the "highest authority" over the 12-man board. Does this sound like "self-government"? Do the members of the 12-man board report to Christ or to the 500 ministers who vote them into office? Is there a conflict of interest here?
When UCG started, some said it was governed by a "Spirit-led consensus". I suppose they meant that God led the 500 ministers to vote for the right members of the Council of Elders and to approve the right proposals that the ministry votes on. But if that is the case, why would God lead UCG to spend money on a move to Dallas, then cancel the move? And why is the GCE so evenly divided in their voting?
But as I point out in my previous blog postings about four months ago, there is another reason, the most important reason, why balloting MUST lead to division and will ALWAYS lead to division.
Proverbs:24:6 teaches us to get counsel from others before making a decision whenever possible. The 500 ministers who vote must be able to freely discuss their differences, not only differences among themselves, but differences between themselves and those holding elected office. They must be free to criticize, and WILL criticize, the men they elect. But this very criticism weakens those in authority and causes division.
It becomes a vicious cycle.
And the whole Church of God is watching this play out in UCG.
A fourth problem with UCG's governance is that they made the decision to overturn Mr. Armstrong's judgment based on human observation rather than God's Word.
As anyone knows who is familiar with my writings in my book, Preaching the Gospel, I do not say that Mr. Armstrong's teachings cannot be changed. Mr. Armstrong himself corrected his own doctrines when he saw by the Bible that they were wrong, and he would have us do the same, I am sure. But before changing a doctrine or judgment Mr. Armstrong taught based on the Bible, the Church should do a thorough Bible study on the subject and prove from the Bible whether that doctrine is right or wrong. And only after proving from the Bible that the doctrine or judgment is wrong or has no basis in the Bible should the doctrine be changed.
UCG has never done that with the doctrine of government from the top down. There is no record or authorization in the Bible that indicates that God rules through the voting of men. If you know of any, show it to me. Acts 1:15-26 is NOT an example of voting, as I point out in my book.
The decision on governance in 1995 was made based on human reason and observation, not the Bible.
It boils down to how to determine truth. That controversy has been going on since Lucifer disbelieved God and chose to experiment for himself with vanity to see if it brought him greater happiness. God must have warned Lucifer, and all the angels, of the dangers of sin, BEFORE Lucifer sinned. And if Lucifer committed the first sin, then there was no one to tempt him, so he didn't sin from personal weakness. I don't think Lucifer deliberately chose a path that would bring him long term misery. But he didn't believe God's warnings. He probably wanted to see for himself, to experiment, if thoughts of vanity and self-exaltation would make him happier.
So rather than trust God to tell the truth and to lead him in the way that produces happiness, Lucifer chose the method of experimentation, observation, and interpretation of results. After he sinned, he became Satan, the Devil.
He taught that same method to Adam and Eve. Eve SAW the fruit (Genesis 3:6). She observed that it was good for food and pleasant to the eyes, just as UCG leaders observed that Mr. Tkach used his one-man authority to make massive doctrinal changes. She interpreted what she saw, just as UCG leaders interpreted what they saw happen in Worldwide to mean that government should not be from the top down, but there should be a system of balloting to prevent any one man from becoming too powerful. And Eve disbelieved God, just as UCG leaders did not trust God's teaching about government in the Bible.
Solomon was another man who experimented. You can read of how he experimented, and observed, and interpreted, in the book of Ecclesiastes. See Ecclesiastes 2:1-11. But his experimenting did not bring him happiness, but frustration and depression, as you can read in the whole book of Ecclesiastes, and he also became unfaithful to God (1 Kings 11:1-13). Contrast this with the example of Abraham, who believed what God told him even when it was contrary to what he observed (Romans 4:3, James 2:23, Genesis 15:4-6).
Today, one of the greatest controversies in the United States is the evolution-vs-creation controversy. I have debated this issue in many blogs and forums, and those who are hard-core atheists and evolutionists will not accept any idea or knowledge that cannot be verified by the scientific method of experimentation, observation, and interpretation of results. For them, the scientific method is not just the best path to truth, but the ONLY path to truth.
But God's method for us to learn truth is to trust His wisdom and integrity enough to believe and obey what He says. As we believe and obey Him, he gives us more wisdom to understand His will and the Bible so we can believe and obey Him more.
The apostles Peter and Paul did not depend on the voting of men for their appointments. You will not find a single example in the Bible of God's authority flowing through the voting of men. Democracy is one of Satan's forms of government, and you can see the results of it in the division and steady weakening of the United States. And it should be obvious that there will be no balloting in the Kingdom of God.
Did God lead Mr. Armstrong to name Mr. Tkach, and if so, why? I answer those questions in chapter 5 of my book.
God Himself is performing an experiment for all mankind. This is not an experiment for God to learn what is true. It is a demonstration experiment, to teach mankind what God already knows is true. It is like experiments in high school chemistry labs, where the students perform a text-book experiment so they can see what happens, but the writers of the textbooks already know the results.
The seven thousand year plan of God is a demonstration to show mankind that man cannot govern himself, and that God's way works best. For six thousand years, mankind has been following the pattern set by Adam and Eve, and set by Satan before that, of learning by experimentation and observation, and then interpreting the results to decide for oneself what is best. But God's way is different. God reveals by His Word, APART from experimentation and observation, what is best, and He commands us to believe Him. Mankind is writing the lesson in death and suffering that the scientific method, when used as a substitute for God's revelation, does not bring long-term good.
I think the same thing is happening in UCG. When God scattered the Church of God for our Laodicean attitude, He allowed one major fellowship to practice governance by the voting of men. I think that just as He is allowing Satan to rule this world for 6,000 years to demonstrate that Satan's way does not work, so He is allowing one major fellowship to govern itself by the voting of men to demonstrate once and for all that democracy does not work, that it causes division, and that it does not prevent doctrinal error.
What is happening in UCG is a mirror-image of what is happening in the United States Congress. They are both the same system, and as our political divisions are weakening our country, so the political divisions in UCG are weakening the Church.
But we must be different if we are to learn the way of life we will practice in the Kingdom on God.
The issue of governance by ballot vs. government from the top down is not going to go away. Government was top down under Mr. Armstrong, and it is because of that top down government that UCG has most of the doctrines that it has. And since 1995, it has been trying to preserve those doctrines by abandoning the principle of government that made those doctrines possible and which is taught in the Bible. It won't work. There is an inconsistancy here, I think what someone in Worldwide once called "cognitive dissonance". You can ignore it, sweep it under the rug, pretend you can solve UCG's problems by appealing to the members and ministry for love and unity, but it won't work. When the foundation is cracked, you cannot solve the problems by patching the building. You have to start over organizationally, from the bottom up, no matter how painful that will be. It will be painful, because it involves admitting to a 15-year mistake, which most people are not willing to do.
I have no doubt that some in United Church of God will do this, and others will not. That is part of the testing process that God is putting the whole Church of God through since the death of Mr. Armstrong.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
A Lesson from the Autobiography, Chapter 6
A Brief History of the Scattering of the Church, Chapter 5
Finding the Solution, Chapter 5
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
The Inconsistencies of Saying We Can't Change Herbert W. Armstrong's Doctrine, Chapter 6
Faith, Chapter 6
Evolution versus the Creation Account in Genesis, Chapter 1
Our Attitude and Approach Towards God's Word, Chapter 1
God's 7,000 Year Plan -- Are We in the Last Days?, Chapter 1
The Feast of Tabernacles - the Millennial Rule of Christ, Chapter 2
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Preaching the Gospel - We Reap what we Sow
I recently listened to a sermon given by Mr. Richard Ames of the Living Church of God a few months ago entitled "Are You Growing Spiritually?" In that sermon he pointed out what Herbert W. Armstrong said about those who grow spiritually being those who have their heart in God's work.
I think it is absolutely true that those whose heart is in God's work tend to grow spiritually. As Mr. Ames reminded me in his sermon, it was Jesus's food to finish God's work (John 4:34). Mr. Ames said that he thought that the reason that some ministers who seemed very solid later went into heresy is that they did not have their heart in God's work.
I agree, but why is that true?
There is a principle involved that we reap what we sow. This is an active principle that can apply to many aspects of God's way of life. For example, in this same sermon, Mr. Ames quoted Proverbs 19:17, "He who has pity on the poor lends to the Lord, And He will pay back what he has given," showing that when we sow mercy by giving to the poor, God will pay us back by giving a blessing to us. It is a particular application of the general principle of "whatever a man sows, that he will also reap" (Galatians 6:7-10, Romans 2:6, Job 34:11, Psalm 62:12, Proverbs 24:11-12, Jeremiah 17:10, 2 Corinthians 9:6).
We can see the application of this principle in the examples written in the Bible for our learning (1 Corinthians 10:11). For example, if you study the life of Jacob, you will notice that he had a problem with lying. He deceived his father by lying to him to obtain a blessing (Genesis 27:1-35). Did God cause him to reap what he sowed? After this, Jacob several times became the victim of the deceptions of others. He was deceived by Laban concerning his wife (Genesis 29:15-30). He was also deceived by Laban several times concerning his wages (Genesis 31:7). He suffered for years mourning for his son Joseph, thinking he was dead, because his sons deceived him (Genesis 37:12-36). So it seems God caused Jacob to reap what he sowed. He sowed deception when he deceived his father to obtain a blessing, and he reaped deception when he was later deceived by Laban numerous times and by his sons when they deceived him about Joseph. No doubt God did this to teach Jacob a lesson about the consequences of lying.
How does this apply to having our hearts in the work of God of preaching the gospel to the world?
Our relationship with God is based on the knowledge of the truth that God has given us. We have that knowledge because others have sacrificed to give us that knowledge. We have been able to learn the truth because Mr. Armstrong and many members in the Church of God and co-workers were zealous and sacrificed to produce the Plain Truth magazine and to broadcast the truth on radio and TV. Either we learned of the truth through the broadcasts and literature, or we learned from others, perhaps our parents, who learned from the broadcasts and literature. Those broadcasts, magazines, and books and booklets were possible only because those who were before us had their heart in the work to the point that they were willing to give up some of the nicer things in this life - restaurant meals, nicer homes, nicer clothes, vacations, etc. - in order to give the truth freely to others as they received freely. There is a principle of reciprocity involved. As we have freely received, we should freely give (Matthew 10:7-8, 2 Corinthians 1:3-4, John 4:35-36).
We know the truth because others have had their heart in the work before us, and we have an obligation to pass that blessing along, to have our hearts in the work and to sacrifice so others can receive the truth as we have received it.
And if we don't?
If we selfishly hold on to the truth for ourselves but do not sacrifice to help give it to others, what then?
I think in that case, God's principle of causing us to reap what we sow goes into effect. What we sow is the decision to not be zealous and sacrifice to pass the truth on to others. What we reap is the result of that decision according to God's judgement. We may receive the fruit of our decision.
What would have been the fruit or the consequence of the decision of others before us if they had decided not to sacrifice to preach the gospel to others? We would never have learned the truth. We would have continued in the world, deceived by Satan. That is the fruit of not having one's heart in the work of preaching the gospel to the world.
And if that is our decision, if we decide not to support the preaching of the gospel to the world, God can take from us the knowledge we have. God could put us in the state we would be in if those before us did not sacrifice to give us the truth. We can fall away from the truth. And I think that may have been what happened to ministers who had a solid foundation in the truth, yet lacked zeal for the work of God, and then fell away.
There is also the scripture in Revelation 12:10-11: "Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, 'Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death.' " Notice that one of the ways Christians overcome Satan is by the word of their testimony. This can apply to giving testimony under threat of martyrdom, as the context seems to indicate, but I think the principle can also apply to giving testimony by sacrificing to support the preaching of the gospel to the world. That is one of the ways of overcoming Satan.
We need to sacrifice to support the preaching of the gospel to the world to pass the blessing of God's truth to others as those before us have sacrificied so we could learn the truth. That is a direct application of God's command to love our neighbor as ourself (Matthew 22:37-40) and to do to others as we want them to do to us (Matthew 7:12).
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Church, Chapter 4
How Could Trained and Experienced Ministers Be Deceived?, Chapter 5
Will Focusing Exclusively on Feeding the Flock Heal the Church?, Chapter 5
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
I think it is absolutely true that those whose heart is in God's work tend to grow spiritually. As Mr. Ames reminded me in his sermon, it was Jesus's food to finish God's work (John 4:34). Mr. Ames said that he thought that the reason that some ministers who seemed very solid later went into heresy is that they did not have their heart in God's work.
I agree, but why is that true?
There is a principle involved that we reap what we sow. This is an active principle that can apply to many aspects of God's way of life. For example, in this same sermon, Mr. Ames quoted Proverbs 19:17, "He who has pity on the poor lends to the Lord, And He will pay back what he has given," showing that when we sow mercy by giving to the poor, God will pay us back by giving a blessing to us. It is a particular application of the general principle of "whatever a man sows, that he will also reap" (Galatians 6:7-10, Romans 2:6, Job 34:11, Psalm 62:12, Proverbs 24:11-12, Jeremiah 17:10, 2 Corinthians 9:6).
We can see the application of this principle in the examples written in the Bible for our learning (1 Corinthians 10:11). For example, if you study the life of Jacob, you will notice that he had a problem with lying. He deceived his father by lying to him to obtain a blessing (Genesis 27:1-35). Did God cause him to reap what he sowed? After this, Jacob several times became the victim of the deceptions of others. He was deceived by Laban concerning his wife (Genesis 29:15-30). He was also deceived by Laban several times concerning his wages (Genesis 31:7). He suffered for years mourning for his son Joseph, thinking he was dead, because his sons deceived him (Genesis 37:12-36). So it seems God caused Jacob to reap what he sowed. He sowed deception when he deceived his father to obtain a blessing, and he reaped deception when he was later deceived by Laban numerous times and by his sons when they deceived him about Joseph. No doubt God did this to teach Jacob a lesson about the consequences of lying.
How does this apply to having our hearts in the work of God of preaching the gospel to the world?
Our relationship with God is based on the knowledge of the truth that God has given us. We have that knowledge because others have sacrificed to give us that knowledge. We have been able to learn the truth because Mr. Armstrong and many members in the Church of God and co-workers were zealous and sacrificed to produce the Plain Truth magazine and to broadcast the truth on radio and TV. Either we learned of the truth through the broadcasts and literature, or we learned from others, perhaps our parents, who learned from the broadcasts and literature. Those broadcasts, magazines, and books and booklets were possible only because those who were before us had their heart in the work to the point that they were willing to give up some of the nicer things in this life - restaurant meals, nicer homes, nicer clothes, vacations, etc. - in order to give the truth freely to others as they received freely. There is a principle of reciprocity involved. As we have freely received, we should freely give (Matthew 10:7-8, 2 Corinthians 1:3-4, John 4:35-36).
We know the truth because others have had their heart in the work before us, and we have an obligation to pass that blessing along, to have our hearts in the work and to sacrifice so others can receive the truth as we have received it.
And if we don't?
If we selfishly hold on to the truth for ourselves but do not sacrifice to help give it to others, what then?
I think in that case, God's principle of causing us to reap what we sow goes into effect. What we sow is the decision to not be zealous and sacrifice to pass the truth on to others. What we reap is the result of that decision according to God's judgement. We may receive the fruit of our decision.
What would have been the fruit or the consequence of the decision of others before us if they had decided not to sacrifice to preach the gospel to others? We would never have learned the truth. We would have continued in the world, deceived by Satan. That is the fruit of not having one's heart in the work of preaching the gospel to the world.
And if that is our decision, if we decide not to support the preaching of the gospel to the world, God can take from us the knowledge we have. God could put us in the state we would be in if those before us did not sacrifice to give us the truth. We can fall away from the truth. And I think that may have been what happened to ministers who had a solid foundation in the truth, yet lacked zeal for the work of God, and then fell away.
There is also the scripture in Revelation 12:10-11: "Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, 'Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death.' " Notice that one of the ways Christians overcome Satan is by the word of their testimony. This can apply to giving testimony under threat of martyrdom, as the context seems to indicate, but I think the principle can also apply to giving testimony by sacrificing to support the preaching of the gospel to the world. That is one of the ways of overcoming Satan.
We need to sacrifice to support the preaching of the gospel to the world to pass the blessing of God's truth to others as those before us have sacrificied so we could learn the truth. That is a direct application of God's command to love our neighbor as ourself (Matthew 22:37-40) and to do to others as we want them to do to us (Matthew 7:12).
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Church, Chapter 4
How Could Trained and Experienced Ministers Be Deceived?, Chapter 5
Will Focusing Exclusively on Feeding the Flock Heal the Church?, Chapter 5
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
Friday, February 19, 2010
"Such a nation as this..."
Does God punish nations for their sins? I mean generally, not just Israel, but any nation that sins against God.
There are many passages in the Old Testament that describe God's punishment of ancient Israel for breaking God's laws and breaking God's covenant with them.
After God brought Israel out of Egypt, He proposed a covenant with them and promised them blessings if they would keep His covenant. Israel agreed to the the covenant, and it was ratified and became binding (Exodus 19:3-8, 24:1-11). God promised blessings for obedience if Israel kept His covenant with them, but curses if they broke His covenant and disobeyed Him (Deuteronomy 4:1-31, 5:32-33, 7:12-15, 8:18-20, 11:26-28, 28:1-68).
The history of Israel after that showed a re-occurring pattern of disobedience and punishment - see Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, and 2 Chronicles. Finally, God sent the house of Israel and the house of Judah into captivity for their persistant unfaithfulness in breaking God's covenant (2 Kings 17:5-23, 2 Chronicles 36:15-21).
God specifically mentions covenant breaking as a cause for his punishment of Israel (Jeremiah 11:9-13, Hosea 8:1-14).
But God did not just pronounce judgment against Israel. He also pronounced judgment and punishment against many of the known nations of that time, nations that never had a covenant with God, never agreed to keep God's commandments, and never knew God and God's laws (Amos 3:1-2, Jeremiah 25:12-33, Jeremiah chapters 46 through 51, Amos chapters 1 and 2). He said He would punish them for their sins even though they are not Israel.
The examples and teaching of the Old Testament are given for our learning (1 Corinthians 10:11). Those examples show how God thinks. And the examples given in the Bible show that God punishes nations for their sins with war and other disasters. Not just Israel.
Now look at God's rebuke of Judah and Jerusalem in Jeremiah 5:9 and Jeremiah 9:9: Mentioning idolotry and sexual sins, God says, " 'How shall I pardon you for this? Your children have forsaken Me And sworn by those that are not gods. When I had fed them to the full, Then they committed adultery And assembled themselves by troops in the harlots' houses. They were like well-fed lusty stallions; Every one neighed after his neighbor’s wife. Shall I not punish them for these things?' says the Lord. 'And shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?' " (Jeremiah 5:7-9). Then mentioning the sins of lying and deceit, God says, " 'And like their bow they have bent their tongues for lies. They are not valiant for the truth on the earth. For they proceed from evil to evil, And they do not know Me,' says the Lord....Everyone will deceive his neighbor, And will not speak the truth; They have taught their tongue to speak lies; They weary themselves to commit iniquity. Your dwelling place is in the midst of deceit; Through deceit they refuse to know Me', says the Lord....Their tongue is an arrow shot out; It speaks deceit; One speaks peaceably to his neighbor with his mouth, But in his heart he lies in wait. Shall I not punish them for these things?' says the Lord. 'Shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?' " (Jeremiah 9:3-9).
After rebuking Judah and Jerusalem for the lying and sexual sins, God says, "And shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?" (Jeremiah 5:9, 9:9). Notice, not just Israel because Israel broke God's covenant. But "such a nation as this." What kind of nation? A nation that practices lying and sexual immorality.
Is the United States such a nation? Do we have sexual sins? Do we lie to each other, in the workplace, in business, in the home, even to our children? You be the judge. But if we are such a nation, God asks the question, "Shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?" Not only because we are Israel and have broken God's covenant. But because we are a sinful nation and God punishes nations for their sins as the examples Jeremiah and Amos show.
The United States is in a state of moral, spiritual, and material decline. We are spending our way into a debt we cannot get out of without bankrupting ourselves, and this in world that is becoming more dangerous by the year. Those who have spiritual discernment and are willing to face hard realities can see that we are heading for disaster. We are digging a hole for ourselves that we will not be able to climb out of by our own power. Our only hope is help, protection, and rescue from God. But will God rescue us without our repentance? Will He rescue us in our sins so we can continue sinning? Or rather will He punish us for our sins as He punished ancient Israel for her sins and as He punished Gentile nations for their sins? I think the examples in the Bible indicate the latter.
The Church of God should have the discernment to see where this country is headed, if our people do not repent. And God's word teaches us to warn those heading towards disaster (Proverbs 24:11-12). The knowledge and spiritual discernment that God has given the Church, along with the command in Proverbs 24:11-12, in effect, makes us a watchman for the United States. That is the effect of what we know. Our knowledge puts the watchman responsibility on our shoulders, and this is God's doing (Ezekiel 3:16-21, 33:1-20).
The Church of God has a responsibility to warn the United States to turn from its sins before it is too late, and to give a warning of the disaster that will come upon us if we do not repent. We need to be zealous to give that warning, motivated by love (Matthew 22:37-40, Matthew 7:12, Leviticus 19:18). The leadership and ministry of the Churches of God should do their part to take advantage of every opportunity to take the true gospel and the Ezekiel warning to the public through television, radio, print media, and the Internet, and to teach the membership of their responsibility to support that effort through their prayers, financial sacrifices, and service.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3
Will Focusing Exclusively on Feeding the Flock Heal the Church?, Chapter 5
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
There are many passages in the Old Testament that describe God's punishment of ancient Israel for breaking God's laws and breaking God's covenant with them.
After God brought Israel out of Egypt, He proposed a covenant with them and promised them blessings if they would keep His covenant. Israel agreed to the the covenant, and it was ratified and became binding (Exodus 19:3-8, 24:1-11). God promised blessings for obedience if Israel kept His covenant with them, but curses if they broke His covenant and disobeyed Him (Deuteronomy 4:1-31, 5:32-33, 7:12-15, 8:18-20, 11:26-28, 28:1-68).
The history of Israel after that showed a re-occurring pattern of disobedience and punishment - see Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, and 2 Chronicles. Finally, God sent the house of Israel and the house of Judah into captivity for their persistant unfaithfulness in breaking God's covenant (2 Kings 17:5-23, 2 Chronicles 36:15-21).
God specifically mentions covenant breaking as a cause for his punishment of Israel (Jeremiah 11:9-13, Hosea 8:1-14).
But God did not just pronounce judgment against Israel. He also pronounced judgment and punishment against many of the known nations of that time, nations that never had a covenant with God, never agreed to keep God's commandments, and never knew God and God's laws (Amos 3:1-2, Jeremiah 25:12-33, Jeremiah chapters 46 through 51, Amos chapters 1 and 2). He said He would punish them for their sins even though they are not Israel.
The examples and teaching of the Old Testament are given for our learning (1 Corinthians 10:11). Those examples show how God thinks. And the examples given in the Bible show that God punishes nations for their sins with war and other disasters. Not just Israel.
Now look at God's rebuke of Judah and Jerusalem in Jeremiah 5:9 and Jeremiah 9:9: Mentioning idolotry and sexual sins, God says, " 'How shall I pardon you for this? Your children have forsaken Me And sworn by those that are not gods. When I had fed them to the full, Then they committed adultery And assembled themselves by troops in the harlots' houses. They were like well-fed lusty stallions; Every one neighed after his neighbor’s wife. Shall I not punish them for these things?' says the Lord. 'And shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?' " (Jeremiah 5:7-9). Then mentioning the sins of lying and deceit, God says, " 'And like their bow they have bent their tongues for lies. They are not valiant for the truth on the earth. For they proceed from evil to evil, And they do not know Me,' says the Lord....Everyone will deceive his neighbor, And will not speak the truth; They have taught their tongue to speak lies; They weary themselves to commit iniquity. Your dwelling place is in the midst of deceit; Through deceit they refuse to know Me', says the Lord....Their tongue is an arrow shot out; It speaks deceit; One speaks peaceably to his neighbor with his mouth, But in his heart he lies in wait. Shall I not punish them for these things?' says the Lord. 'Shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?' " (Jeremiah 9:3-9).
After rebuking Judah and Jerusalem for the lying and sexual sins, God says, "And shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?" (Jeremiah 5:9, 9:9). Notice, not just Israel because Israel broke God's covenant. But "such a nation as this." What kind of nation? A nation that practices lying and sexual immorality.
Is the United States such a nation? Do we have sexual sins? Do we lie to each other, in the workplace, in business, in the home, even to our children? You be the judge. But if we are such a nation, God asks the question, "Shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?" Not only because we are Israel and have broken God's covenant. But because we are a sinful nation and God punishes nations for their sins as the examples Jeremiah and Amos show.
The United States is in a state of moral, spiritual, and material decline. We are spending our way into a debt we cannot get out of without bankrupting ourselves, and this in world that is becoming more dangerous by the year. Those who have spiritual discernment and are willing to face hard realities can see that we are heading for disaster. We are digging a hole for ourselves that we will not be able to climb out of by our own power. Our only hope is help, protection, and rescue from God. But will God rescue us without our repentance? Will He rescue us in our sins so we can continue sinning? Or rather will He punish us for our sins as He punished ancient Israel for her sins and as He punished Gentile nations for their sins? I think the examples in the Bible indicate the latter.
The Church of God should have the discernment to see where this country is headed, if our people do not repent. And God's word teaches us to warn those heading towards disaster (Proverbs 24:11-12). The knowledge and spiritual discernment that God has given the Church, along with the command in Proverbs 24:11-12, in effect, makes us a watchman for the United States. That is the effect of what we know. Our knowledge puts the watchman responsibility on our shoulders, and this is God's doing (Ezekiel 3:16-21, 33:1-20).
The Church of God has a responsibility to warn the United States to turn from its sins before it is too late, and to give a warning of the disaster that will come upon us if we do not repent. We need to be zealous to give that warning, motivated by love (Matthew 22:37-40, Matthew 7:12, Leviticus 19:18). The leadership and ministry of the Churches of God should do their part to take advantage of every opportunity to take the true gospel and the Ezekiel warning to the public through television, radio, print media, and the Internet, and to teach the membership of their responsibility to support that effort through their prayers, financial sacrifices, and service.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
The Ezekiel Warning, Chapter 3
Will Focusing Exclusively on Feeding the Flock Heal the Church?, Chapter 5
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
Monday, February 1, 2010
A Lesson from Haggai
There are several Church of God groups today which seem to teach that the preaching of the gospel to the world is over, that it was completed by Mr. Armstrong, and that there should not be a high priority placed on public proclamation, rather, the Church of God should place a high priority only on feeding the flock and getting the bride ready.
There is a lesson I think in the book of Haggai that might apply here.
The book of Haggai starts, "In the second year of King Darius, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet to Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and to Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, saying, 'Thus speaks the Lord of hosts, saying: "This people says, 'The time has not come, the time that the Lord’s house should be built' " ' " (Haggai 1:1-2).
The book of Haggai was written after Judah was taken captive by Babylon, and after some Jews had been allowed to return to Judah. There are parallels between that time in the history of Israel and our time in the Church of God today. The Jews had been scattered and reduced in power, just as the Church of God has been scattered and reduced in power in our time in the last two decades.
The Jews were not prospering, just as in many ways the Church of God has not been prospering since the death of Mr. Armstrong. The people were saying that it was not time to build the temple.
God's reply: "Then the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet, saying, 'Is it time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, and this temple to lie in ruins?' Now therefore, thus says the Lord of hosts: 'Consider your ways! You have sown much, and bring in little; You eat, but do not have enough; You drink, but you are not filled with drink; You clothe yourselves, but no one is warm; And he who earns wages, Earns wages to put into a bag with holes.' Thus says the Lord of hosts: 'Consider your ways! Go up to the mountains and bring wood and build the temple, that I may take pleasure in it and be glorified,' says the Lord. 'You looked for much, but indeed it came to little; and when you brought it home, I blew it away. Why?' says the Lord of hosts. 'Because of My house that is in ruins, while every one of you runs to his own house. Therefore the heavens above you withhold the dew, and the earth withholds its fruit. For I called for a drought on the land and the mountains, on the grain and the new wine and the oil, on whatever the ground brings forth, on men and livestock, and on all the labor of your hands' " (Haggai 1:3-11).
Today, God's temple is the Church (1 Corinthians 3:16-17). As in Haggai's day, many say that this is not the time to build God's temple. But God's reply to the people in Haggai's time is to go to the mountains and bring wood to build the temple. In the Bible, mountains can represent nations or kingdoms (Isaiah 2:2-3, Isaiah 2:12-14, Isaiah 11:9, Isaiah 52:7, Jeremiah 51:25, Ezekiel 6:1-3, Ezekiel 17:22-23, Ezekiel 33:28, Ezekiel 36:1-4, Daniel 2:35, Micah 4:1). If the lesson of Haggai applies to us today, we are to go to the nations, that is, the public, and bring "wood" or material to build God's temple, the Church. In other words, this is still the time to preach the gospel, to bring in new members, and to build the Church of God.
The lessons in the Old Testament are written for our example to learn from (1 Corinthians 10:11).
The door to preaching the gospel is still open. We still have enough freedom and money to publish and broadcast. New members are still being called into the Church of God and baptized. The opportunities are there, and people need our message. We need the spiritual discernment and vision to see the opportunity, the need, and the responsibility. "Jesus said to them, 'My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work. Do you not say, "There are still four months and then comes the harvest"? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are already white for harvest!' " (John 4:34-35).
The leaders, ministry, and members of the whole Church of God need to have a zeal to finish God's work of preaching the gospel to the world, feeding the flock, and preaching the Ezekiel warning to Israel. We can do much more than we have done so far. We need to imitate the zeal of Jesus Christ who was so zealous to finish God's work that it was like food to Him. We also should have a desire to finish God's work as we have a desire for food. And God's work still includes preaching to the public a message of repentance, of warning, and of the good news of the coming kingdom of God.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Will Focusing Exclusively on Feeding the Flock Heal the Church?, Chapter 5
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
The Church, Chapter 4
There is a lesson I think in the book of Haggai that might apply here.
The book of Haggai starts, "In the second year of King Darius, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet to Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and to Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, saying, 'Thus speaks the Lord of hosts, saying: "This people says, 'The time has not come, the time that the Lord’s house should be built' " ' " (Haggai 1:1-2).
The book of Haggai was written after Judah was taken captive by Babylon, and after some Jews had been allowed to return to Judah. There are parallels between that time in the history of Israel and our time in the Church of God today. The Jews had been scattered and reduced in power, just as the Church of God has been scattered and reduced in power in our time in the last two decades.
The Jews were not prospering, just as in many ways the Church of God has not been prospering since the death of Mr. Armstrong. The people were saying that it was not time to build the temple.
God's reply: "Then the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet, saying, 'Is it time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, and this temple to lie in ruins?' Now therefore, thus says the Lord of hosts: 'Consider your ways! You have sown much, and bring in little; You eat, but do not have enough; You drink, but you are not filled with drink; You clothe yourselves, but no one is warm; And he who earns wages, Earns wages to put into a bag with holes.' Thus says the Lord of hosts: 'Consider your ways! Go up to the mountains and bring wood and build the temple, that I may take pleasure in it and be glorified,' says the Lord. 'You looked for much, but indeed it came to little; and when you brought it home, I blew it away. Why?' says the Lord of hosts. 'Because of My house that is in ruins, while every one of you runs to his own house. Therefore the heavens above you withhold the dew, and the earth withholds its fruit. For I called for a drought on the land and the mountains, on the grain and the new wine and the oil, on whatever the ground brings forth, on men and livestock, and on all the labor of your hands' " (Haggai 1:3-11).
Today, God's temple is the Church (1 Corinthians 3:16-17). As in Haggai's day, many say that this is not the time to build God's temple. But God's reply to the people in Haggai's time is to go to the mountains and bring wood to build the temple. In the Bible, mountains can represent nations or kingdoms (Isaiah 2:2-3, Isaiah 2:12-14, Isaiah 11:9, Isaiah 52:7, Jeremiah 51:25, Ezekiel 6:1-3, Ezekiel 17:22-23, Ezekiel 33:28, Ezekiel 36:1-4, Daniel 2:35, Micah 4:1). If the lesson of Haggai applies to us today, we are to go to the nations, that is, the public, and bring "wood" or material to build God's temple, the Church. In other words, this is still the time to preach the gospel, to bring in new members, and to build the Church of God.
The lessons in the Old Testament are written for our example to learn from (1 Corinthians 10:11).
The door to preaching the gospel is still open. We still have enough freedom and money to publish and broadcast. New members are still being called into the Church of God and baptized. The opportunities are there, and people need our message. We need the spiritual discernment and vision to see the opportunity, the need, and the responsibility. "Jesus said to them, 'My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work. Do you not say, "There are still four months and then comes the harvest"? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are already white for harvest!' " (John 4:34-35).
The leaders, ministry, and members of the whole Church of God need to have a zeal to finish God's work of preaching the gospel to the world, feeding the flock, and preaching the Ezekiel warning to Israel. We can do much more than we have done so far. We need to imitate the zeal of Jesus Christ who was so zealous to finish God's work that it was like food to Him. We also should have a desire to finish God's work as we have a desire for food. And God's work still includes preaching to the public a message of repentance, of warning, and of the good news of the coming kingdom of God.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Will Focusing Exclusively on Feeding the Flock Heal the Church?, Chapter 5
Is the Church Commissioned to Preach the Gospel to the World?, Chapter 5
The Church, Chapter 4
Friday, January 1, 2010
UCG Council of Elders letter
The United Church of God Council of Elders sent a letter to the UCG ministry December 28, 2009, according to Ambassador Watch (Gavin Rumney blog, an anti-COG website). The entire text of the letter can be found at his site in his December 31 posting. Note: the posting itself does not include anti-COG opinion, but the comments section does, in case you want to avoid it.
The letter is an appeal for unity and cooperation in the face of a spirit of division and contention growing in UCG at this time.
Many of the UCG ministers seem to be aligned into two camps with different opinions on a variety of matters. There has been a recent change in the leadership of UCG because of the last election.
I won't try to go into details of the matters in which they differ. The move to Texas was one matter, and there may be many others.
The letter addresses the problem of division in a strong way, and much of what is written is good. It is a warning in effect that unless the ministry as a whole builds a spirit of cooperation instead of contention, great spiritual damage will be done to the Church, and though it was not stated explicitly, I think there is an implied warning that if the spirit of division continues to grow, it will fragment United Church of God at some point.
I want to comment on one cause of the division, and some lessons that can be learned.
This letter refers repeatedly to the decision in 1995 to establish governance by the election of a ruling Council of Elders by the general ministry by ballot, which is a different form of governance than the Church had before. And the letter goes on to describe a pattern of divisiveness and contention which has grown to become the dominant spirit in United Church of God.
I believe I can show that there is a connection between the two. One is a contributing cause of the other.
I can understand why United Church of God chose this system of governance. I was attending Worldwide at the time United Church of God formed. I didn't leave Worldwide until after UCG had formed, and then I attended with them for a while. At the time UCG started, there did not seem to be any alternative to governance by ballot. There was no one leader with the standing in the eyes of the ministry to assume leadership without election by the ministry at large. I think the motive for governance by ballot was a desire for unity and cooperation and to keep the ministry together. There may have also been some concern that a system of checks and balances was needed so that no one man had the authority to change doctrine without the consent of the majority of the ministers, as had happened in Worldwide.
But the fruits of that decision have become apparent over time.
It has been instructive. I actually understand certain principles of democracy better than I did before, even as it applies to the United States government, from watching events in UCG. In other words, watching the spirit of division grow in UCG has helped me better understand why the United States is so divided in its politics and government.
There is a biblical principle that those under authority should respect and submit to those over them in authority. That is how government works. Part of that respect and submission includes not openly criticizing those who hold an office of authority in front of those under that office. When you do that, you weaken the authority of the office and make it more difficult for leaders to lead.
But in order for democracy to function, there must be freedom to criticize. Those who vote by ballot must be free to discuss their voting decision with others, even when those discussions include harsh criticism. I understand now why the freedoms of speech and press in the Bill of Rights are vital to the functioning of democracy in the United States. It does no good to give the people the authority to vote their leaders out of office if those in office have the power to squelch dissent and free expression. Without the free flow of information and opinion, government leaders can stiffle information critical of themselves or favorable to their opponents. But the price that is paid is that of division and factionalism. We see that in the political arena in the United States. And we can see it in the United Church of God.
This kind of factionalism will always grow in a democracy.
Why does this happen whenever those under authority elect those over them by ballot?
You have an immediate conflict of interest. Authority is weakened when those under the authority harshly criticize those above them, but such criticism must be allowed in order for the body doing the voting (General Conference of Elders) to exchange information and views to make decisions on how to vote. Then such criticism begets more criticism as those who are criticized retaliate. It is an unstable system of governance that weakens and becomes more divided over time.
The letter contrasts what is occurring now in UCG with what would not have been allowed in Worldwide or in the individual congregations.
"We would never have allowed this in our former association!" - That is because the former association was not ruled from the ballot box.
"We would never allow it in the congregations that we pastor." - That is because the members of a congregation do not elect their pastor by ballot.
"In what some of our members like to call the 'real world' in which they work, such breaches of confidentiality, slander and lack of organizational cohesiveness would be dealt with immediately by appropriate disciplinary action for those responsible." - That is because the typical workplace is not a democracy. The workers do not elect their bosses by ballot.
"Why should we be different and why should the unity once a hallmark of God’s people be different now?" - Because UCG has chosen a form of governance based on voting of those under authority to elect those over them in authority. The natural effect of that is increasing division over time.
All the Churches of God and their members are now seeing the fruits play out of the 1995 decision by UCG ministers to establish a body based on the authority of the ballot box.
God is letting us all learn lessons from this example.
What is the alternative to governance by ballot in the absense of a strong leader with the prestige to hold the church together without voting?
Suppose those pastors leaving Worldwide in the spring of 1995 had not formed a single organized corporation at all. Suppose those pastors had simply pastored their congregations, collecting tithes and offerings from the members of their congregations, trusting God for the finances and guidence they needed. Some ministers might organize independently, and some might attach themselves to another man they respected and trusted. You would have ended up with many small churches, some with one minister, some with three or four ministers with one man in charge, but each leader of a group would look directly to God for supervision and support. That is what Herbert W. Armstrong did when he left the employment of Church of God Seventh Day. There would have been no voting.
Wouldn't this have created greater division? Absolutely not.
It would have become evident which pastors had a true spirit of cooperation, and those pastors would have cooperated and helped each other in many ways, not by legal requirement, but willingly, as brothers help brothers in a family. And over time, God would show by the fruits which man He chose to lead the other pastors, and as the fruits of love, wisdom, courage, truthfulness, and effectiveness of that man became evident, the other pastors and the whole Church could have gathered to that man. In effect, it would be Christ who would chose the man by showing by the fruits which man He blessed. That man would receive authority by the election of God, not by the election of men.
It might take longer that way to sort things out, but if that had been done starting in 1995, by now the man God had chosen might be in charge and we would not have the division in UCG we see today.
You will always have factions and divisions in a democracy as different sides struggle for control. I think this will become increasingly evident over time.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Should Each Member Promote His Own Opinion?, Chapter 6
When and How to Judge, Chapter 5
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
The letter is an appeal for unity and cooperation in the face of a spirit of division and contention growing in UCG at this time.
Many of the UCG ministers seem to be aligned into two camps with different opinions on a variety of matters. There has been a recent change in the leadership of UCG because of the last election.
I won't try to go into details of the matters in which they differ. The move to Texas was one matter, and there may be many others.
The letter addresses the problem of division in a strong way, and much of what is written is good. It is a warning in effect that unless the ministry as a whole builds a spirit of cooperation instead of contention, great spiritual damage will be done to the Church, and though it was not stated explicitly, I think there is an implied warning that if the spirit of division continues to grow, it will fragment United Church of God at some point.
I want to comment on one cause of the division, and some lessons that can be learned.
This letter refers repeatedly to the decision in 1995 to establish governance by the election of a ruling Council of Elders by the general ministry by ballot, which is a different form of governance than the Church had before. And the letter goes on to describe a pattern of divisiveness and contention which has grown to become the dominant spirit in United Church of God.
I believe I can show that there is a connection between the two. One is a contributing cause of the other.
I can understand why United Church of God chose this system of governance. I was attending Worldwide at the time United Church of God formed. I didn't leave Worldwide until after UCG had formed, and then I attended with them for a while. At the time UCG started, there did not seem to be any alternative to governance by ballot. There was no one leader with the standing in the eyes of the ministry to assume leadership without election by the ministry at large. I think the motive for governance by ballot was a desire for unity and cooperation and to keep the ministry together. There may have also been some concern that a system of checks and balances was needed so that no one man had the authority to change doctrine without the consent of the majority of the ministers, as had happened in Worldwide.
But the fruits of that decision have become apparent over time.
It has been instructive. I actually understand certain principles of democracy better than I did before, even as it applies to the United States government, from watching events in UCG. In other words, watching the spirit of division grow in UCG has helped me better understand why the United States is so divided in its politics and government.
There is a biblical principle that those under authority should respect and submit to those over them in authority. That is how government works. Part of that respect and submission includes not openly criticizing those who hold an office of authority in front of those under that office. When you do that, you weaken the authority of the office and make it more difficult for leaders to lead.
But in order for democracy to function, there must be freedom to criticize. Those who vote by ballot must be free to discuss their voting decision with others, even when those discussions include harsh criticism. I understand now why the freedoms of speech and press in the Bill of Rights are vital to the functioning of democracy in the United States. It does no good to give the people the authority to vote their leaders out of office if those in office have the power to squelch dissent and free expression. Without the free flow of information and opinion, government leaders can stiffle information critical of themselves or favorable to their opponents. But the price that is paid is that of division and factionalism. We see that in the political arena in the United States. And we can see it in the United Church of God.
This kind of factionalism will always grow in a democracy.
Why does this happen whenever those under authority elect those over them by ballot?
You have an immediate conflict of interest. Authority is weakened when those under the authority harshly criticize those above them, but such criticism must be allowed in order for the body doing the voting (General Conference of Elders) to exchange information and views to make decisions on how to vote. Then such criticism begets more criticism as those who are criticized retaliate. It is an unstable system of governance that weakens and becomes more divided over time.
The letter contrasts what is occurring now in UCG with what would not have been allowed in Worldwide or in the individual congregations.
"We would never have allowed this in our former association!" - That is because the former association was not ruled from the ballot box.
"We would never allow it in the congregations that we pastor." - That is because the members of a congregation do not elect their pastor by ballot.
"In what some of our members like to call the 'real world' in which they work, such breaches of confidentiality, slander and lack of organizational cohesiveness would be dealt with immediately by appropriate disciplinary action for those responsible." - That is because the typical workplace is not a democracy. The workers do not elect their bosses by ballot.
"Why should we be different and why should the unity once a hallmark of God’s people be different now?" - Because UCG has chosen a form of governance based on voting of those under authority to elect those over them in authority. The natural effect of that is increasing division over time.
All the Churches of God and their members are now seeing the fruits play out of the 1995 decision by UCG ministers to establish a body based on the authority of the ballot box.
God is letting us all learn lessons from this example.
What is the alternative to governance by ballot in the absense of a strong leader with the prestige to hold the church together without voting?
Suppose those pastors leaving Worldwide in the spring of 1995 had not formed a single organized corporation at all. Suppose those pastors had simply pastored their congregations, collecting tithes and offerings from the members of their congregations, trusting God for the finances and guidence they needed. Some ministers might organize independently, and some might attach themselves to another man they respected and trusted. You would have ended up with many small churches, some with one minister, some with three or four ministers with one man in charge, but each leader of a group would look directly to God for supervision and support. That is what Herbert W. Armstrong did when he left the employment of Church of God Seventh Day. There would have been no voting.
Wouldn't this have created greater division? Absolutely not.
It would have become evident which pastors had a true spirit of cooperation, and those pastors would have cooperated and helped each other in many ways, not by legal requirement, but willingly, as brothers help brothers in a family. And over time, God would show by the fruits which man He chose to lead the other pastors, and as the fruits of love, wisdom, courage, truthfulness, and effectiveness of that man became evident, the other pastors and the whole Church could have gathered to that man. In effect, it would be Christ who would chose the man by showing by the fruits which man He blessed. That man would receive authority by the election of God, not by the election of men.
It might take longer that way to sort things out, but if that had been done starting in 1995, by now the man God had chosen might be in charge and we would not have the division in UCG we see today.
You will always have factions and divisions in a democracy as different sides struggle for control. I think this will become increasingly evident over time.
Here are links to related sections in Preaching the Gospel:
Should Each Member Promote His Own Opinion?, Chapter 6
When and How to Judge, Chapter 5
Government in the Church, Chapter 5
Following the Bible -- Pattern of Government, Chapter 6
Church Government, Chapter 7
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
