Assuming A Sunday Law

Claims of a prophetic Sunday Law are widely accepted within Seventh-Day Adventism, but are unfamiliar to outsiders, including SDA split-off groups. Is Sunday Law inevitable or assumed?

---

Raise your hand if you believe the prophetic mark of the Beast is a mandatory Sunday Law.
I bet if you raised your hand then you've had contact with the Seventh Day Adventist church.
Why?
Because it was originally given by Ellen G White.

An SDA meme supporting Sunday Law

ABD is an Armstrongist blog, but I need to go on a side quest today. I had a brief chat with ABD author Child Survivor on a certain SDA page on social media and now the algorithm thinks I'm SDA. Ever since, I have been inundated with AI-generated graphics like you see here.

The proof text in this image, Revelation 13:11-17, shows up over and over again in Sunday Law claims. But this selection only talks about a Beast and a mark. The Bible is not precise about what either of those two are. Few details given. If it were precise, we would not need anything else; we would just point to the verses and there you go. Nothing in the Bible directs us when to go to church, or that Satan is the Lord of worshipping the true God on a certain day, or anything like that.
My point is, Revelation 13 is not evidence but the end of a long line of conclusions that must be accepted first.

Being an Armstrongist background and not SDA, I have never been exposed to that line of conclusions. I've never had Sunday Law explained to me before. So, I asked for someone to explain it to me like I'm a Sabbath-keeper who isn't from the SDA church. The only response came from a woman who said (and I paraphrase), prophecy tells of a little church who keeps the Ten Commandments and is persecuted because they won't accept the mark of the Beast.
That's pretty much all she said.

Now, do I believe that was genuinely a good explanation of it? No. Judging from other material the algorithm forces in front of me, I am certain someone else would explain it differently, certainly in more detail, maybe including Ellen G White's prophecies. However, what I do believe is that these were the core highlights, the bare minimum that this woman accepted and thought I needed. And I do believe this will be enough to work with.

But let's stop and think a minute.

Is it true that little church + Commandments + mark of Beast = Sunday Law? So true that everyone should preach this wherever they can and all across social media, with hundreds of AI-generated memes? There are entire "ministries" whose whole message is, “Sunday Law is coming.” Is there really no other reasonable conclusion one could reach from stringing together these three ideas? For example, should I doubt my own sanity if I propose little church + Commandments + mark of Beast = Friday Law?? (Who is the Lord of Friday?)
"Little church + Commandments + mark of Beast" is straight in line with Armstrongism. They even believe they will be persecuted for observing Sabbath. Yet they have no general teachings about Sunday Law. How can other groups accept every detail but still miss the conclusion?
(The answer is Ellen White, of course. But don't jump there yet or we can't investigate the claim.)

Something is not adding up. Let's deconstruct the claim.

ONE THING LEADS TO ANOTHER

The conclusion has been constructed from layers of assumptions:

We assume the little flock Jesus spoke of is an end-time prophecy. →
We assume we are that little flock. →
We assume the little flock is the same as the 144,000 of Revelation 7 & 14 →
We assume the little flock is little because of some unpopular difference in doctrine. →
We assume that doctrinal difference is specifically a keeping of the Ten Commandments →
We assume the key difference is with the Sabbath Commandment in particular →
We assume the way to keep the Sabbath Commandment is to go to church on Saturday. →
We assume going to church on Saturday is that doctrinal difference. →
We assume going to church on Saturday is the mark of God in the New Testament. →
We assume the opposite of church on Saturday is church on Sunday. →
We assume anyone who goes to church on Sunday will be in league with the Beast. →
We assume church on Sunday is the mark of the Beast. →
We assume the Beast persecutes Saturday worship. →
We arrive at the conclusion that the way the Beast persecutes Sabbatarians is by a Sunday Law.

Someone might say to me they do not affirm every one of these steps. But some version of each step must be assumed somewhere along the way for the conclusion to hold. If anything, I've left several steps out (I'm purposefully ignoring Sabbath seal given to Israel).
Another might say to me these are proven points not assumptions. I disagree. Just because you strongly believe a point does not mean it's proven. Us humans have a hard time telling the difference between facts and familiarity. Our emotions tend to override our rationality (feel trumps real). Many of these points are about prophecy; prophecy that has not come to pass yet. And that makes them speculative at best. If the proofs for these individual steps are built on the same kind of reasoning as the Sunday Law they lead up to (and they are), then I wouldn't agree we should use the word "proof".

Here's a little secret. Today's post is not really about Sunday Law, it's about assumptions, evidence, and proof, and being able to tell the difference.

I stand by my claim Sunday Law is built on a chain of assumptions.
It's not explicit in the Bible. It's not taken from history. It's not in early church teachings. It's not something a person would typically come to completely on their own. It often ignores as much as it includes. It's rarely taught in other churches; even Sabbatarian churches; even Sabbatarian churches with a strong focus on Pre-Tribulation end-times prophecy. It doesn't take any other possibilities into account. It's predictions keep failing. And, frankly, it's not particularly logical.
In places it's circular. (How do you know you're part of the little flock? Because I keep the Sabbath. How do you know you're supposed to keep the Sabbath? Because I'm part of the little flock.) In other places it's non sequitur. (How do you know the little flock and the 144,000 are the same? Because both are little.)

And, unspoken in all of this is one more assumption: it is anti-Catholic. Not anti-Islam, nor anti-Orthodox, not anti-Progressivist, nor anti-atheist, but anti-Catholic. That thread runs throughout the entire chain. Why can't Friday Law be a possibility? Because Sunday Law is at heart anti-Catholic, and the Catholics don't go to church on Friday. It is a polemic from the 1800s that has not adapted to 150 years of time.

I fully grant that there have been laws enacted in the past regarding Sunday. Who would deny it? But past Sunday laws merely demonstrate Sunday legislation is possible, not inevitable. They do not come remotely close to proving that “mark of the Beast = Sunday Law" is correct.

(For more on Sunday laws in the past, see "Constantine vs The Sabbath".) 

LITTLE FLOCK

Let's dig into that "little flock" a bit (LUK. 12:32). 

The SDA church (and many besides) adopt biblical terms for themselves, like "remnant". When we boil it all down, the idea is to get the prophecies to refer to themselves; to make themselves the star of the show. But how can they? There is absolutely no way to prove this out before it happens.

First, we have to assume terms like "little flock" are prophetic. As if Jesus never intended the mustard seed to grow (LUK. 13: 19).
Second, not just prophetic but end-time prophetic. When I read Luke 12, I don't see Jesus intending to skip 2,000 years of time and speak only about the Father caring for some end-time church.
Third, we have to assume the SDA church is that end-time church. But what of all the other Sabbatarian (and non-Sabbatarian) churches who make this same claim about being the little flock? Armstrongism claims to be the 144,000, and they claim the SDA are a false church led by a false prophetess. Which is right? Armstrongism is a lot smaller!
Fourth, we have to assume little flock and the 144,000 are the same. I see nothing in the Bible to support this.
Fifth, we have to ignore stated details. The 144,000 are associated with Israelite tribes. We have to ignore almost everything about it except the number to reach this conclusion. The Messianic Jews are a much better match than the SDA.
Sixth, we have to ignore that the SDA church is not little. Let's be honest. You can't just barely miss a list of top ten churches in the world by size and still call yourself little. There are thousands of denominations and most of them are smaller than the SDA.
Seventh, 25 million people cannot all claim to be the 144k. Do the math. 144 thousand is one half of one percent of 25 million. The odds of any single SDA member making that number are slim. "We are the true church because 99.5% of us won't make it," is neither convincing nor hopeful.
Eighth, we have to completely ignore the innumerable multitude from Revelation 7:9. One church cannot be a little flock and an "innumerable multitude" at the same time.

I think that list is long enough. Do you see what I'm driving at here? Everything here is concocted; nothing is proved. The conclusion was reached at the start, then verses had to be found to make it look like they did the math. This illustrates why I personally do not trust prophetic interpretation. It cheats. It's a game. Not surprisingly, it always ends up with exactly what the person doing the speculating wanted to begin with. Seriously, have you ever heard of a church who claimed, "We looked into it, but we feel we aren't that church"?

I'll say it, then.
I've read Revelation 7, and seeing as I am not at all descended from Israel, I feel I am not one of the 144,000.
Was that so hard?

TWO FINAL ASSUMPTIONS

I want to drive this home with two more critical assumptions.

The deepest and most fundamental assumption for today is: Ellen G White is a prophetess of God. Sunday Law depends upon this, whether you recognize it or not. 

I am not going to attack Ellen G White. This is a blog about Armstrongism. However, you will find that the ultimate source of the claim is Ellen White, and the ultimate refuge of the claim is Ellen White. Before Ellen, many tried to identify the Beast and its mark, but it was Ellen who first popularized the Sunday Law within Adventism (whether it was originally her idea or not). So, it all stands and falls with her.
Ellen + prophet = Sunday Law.

The last assumption is the always near but never realized future. Or, put another way, kicking the can down the road and moving the goal posts.

In the mid-1800s, this Sunday Law was supposed to be very soon. "Sooner than you think." Unlike Herbert Armstrong, Ellen had learned the lesson from William Miller's failure about the danger of setting hard dates. She preferred to stay more vague. However, for the past 170 years this Law has been immediately about to occur. Sunday Law may not have been tied to hard dates, but it was tied to time and events.

As for the time --
"Soon" is not a date but it is a time. I don't see how not having a hard date which comes and goes makes it any better than saying "soon" which comes and goes ...multiple times. To whom else would this kind of leeway be given? If your kids said they would clean "sooner than you think" but 150 years later the house wasn't clean, how would you feel about the accuracy of their statement? Or let's say you get a fortune cookie that predicts you will come into a large sum of money "sooner than you think", but 150 years later you're still broke, how would you feel about the predictive abilities of that cookie?

As for the events --
"Blue Laws" in the United States, development of the European Union, statements from the Pope, movements in Protestantism, religious debates in the West, wars, and many other things have all been said to be the event that has started the initiation of Sunday Law. ("Has started", past tense.) All of this was supposed to be in motion already ...150 years ago. More recently, it was supposed to begin in earnest under Pope Francis. Well, he's dead now. Time to update the memes to Pope Leo. And they have! There were SDA all up in arms about Donald Trump encouraging a national Saturday Sabbath for the Jews in honor of America's 250th birthday. How'd that turn out? Here is a comment I saw in response to the Trump's proclamation: "People it's happening, wake up! Prophecies are being fulfilled..." Yeah. That must have been it.

You can literally do the opposite of a Sunday Law and it's proof of a Sunday Law. If everything is evidence, then nothing is.

What was it God said about prophecies (DEU. 18: 20-22)?

All of the predictions come and go. This is not unique to Sunday Law by any means. It is the same pattern across the board with end-times predictions. But at some point, the number of times "it's beginning right now" has been claimed and failed to come about must be considered. "It has failed a hundred times but it hasn't been proven wrong yet," is just kicking the can down the road. It's an intellectually dishonest way out. Moving the goal posts and trying again is not noble.

When I pointed out these manifold failures to one person, they quoted I Peter 3:1-9 at me, then finished it up with, "You’re saying the same thing that many people have said, but God knows the timing he’s wanting All to repent… And become part of his good kingdom and not have to experience the hell of the second death!"
God is wanting all to repent. But pointing out the undeniable fact that predictions of Sunday Law have failed over and again is not even remotely the same as denying Jesus will return. And I think this reveals the heart of the problem. Some people can no longer tell the difference.

Or perhaps they can but they refuse to, because they need Sunday Law to make them feel special. That would explain much. Perhaps Sunday Law isn't about the future at all, it's about the self. Legalism has a way of making a person feel inadequate. One needs something to latch onto to bring the self back up again. Sunday Law could be the vehicle the ego craves. Just a thought.

CONCLUSION

Does Revelation 13 say Sunday worship is the mark of the Beast? No.
Is Ezekiel 20 an end-times prophecy intended for a general audience? No. It says who the message was for. Seriously, have you read it? It's mainly a recap of the Exodus.
So, do proof-texts like these prove a Sunday law? No. One must already accept a Sunday law in order to think they do, which is why so many don't think they do. Sunday law is being forced into these verses, not taken from them.

The Sunday law teaching is doing so very much, yet it's so fragile. If any one of the major assumptions fails, it could topple the entire structure. What if some other group is the little flock? Or what if it's Tuesday Law?

How many prooftexts taken completely out of context do I need in order to prove a thing? 1? 5? 20? Can I say, "Sure, these verses have almost nothing to do with my conclusion, but I have several of them, so I'm right!" ??   No.
There is a 144,000, but we haven’t proven who they are, we’ve only assigned who they are. There is a mark, but we haven’t proven what it is, we’ve only asserted. There is a persecution, but we haven’t proven what form it will take, we’ve only projected.
Those points should reveal that in the end of the matter we haven’t genuinely proven Sunday Law or its underlying assumptions.

Am I saying there will be no Second Coming or end times or mark of the Beast? On the contrary! What I argue against is eisegesis and presenting prophetic speculation as settled truth. Is the mark of the Beast a mandatory Sunday Law enacted to torment the true church right where they are most vulnerable? No one but God knows for certain, but I sincerely doubt it based on the evidence provided and the track record so far.

Today's post isn't really about Sunday Law. Today's post is about thinking. It's about proper Bible study, logic, and standards of evidence. It's about assumptions and beloved traditions. And it's about knowing the difference.

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

Eschatological Bias

A friend of mine was discussing Daniel and Revelation, and I just couldn't resist that old familiar urge to dig into prophecy. This is dangerous territory! And just in time for Tabernacles.

First, let's define eschatology. Someone out there might not be familiar with this word. Eschatology is the study of final things, ie. end times. It comes from the Greek word eschatos, which means the farthest or final. Few things are more central to Armstrongism than eschatology, even though most members wouldn't use that word. I think it really is the bread and butter of the whole movement.

Many people have wasted their lives trying to nail prophecy down. I do not recommend it. But this I will recommend - if you simply must dig into end times, then look into as many interpretations as possible and avoid locking yourself into any single one. Know all the possibilities, measure them all, then watch and pray to see which best matches the evidence as we go along. I'm not saying don't have a favorite. I'm just saying keep open the option of being wrong.

I know the natural inclination is to only investigate in order to try and disprove every one except your favorite, but I am not talking about disproving. I am talking about genuinely comparing and contrasting. The problem preventing most of us from doing this boils down to systems, assumptions, and bias. Ditch these three. They aren't doing you any favors.

We tend to get invested in particular eschatological systems; schemes of interpreting Biblical prophecy. Maybe that system is the only one we've ever known. Maybe it's the core of our "one true church" and thus has been elevated to "God's truth". (That is how Armstrongism would feel.) Maybe we simply refuse to review our prior footsteps for whatever reason. That particular system becomes our assumptions. It colors everything we see. We go into everything else with these assumptions. And that is called bias.

What do I mean by "systems"? There are several. They generally focus on two items: the Millennium, and the Tribulation. Are we currently before, within, or after the Millennium and the Tribulation? Or, are they symbolic and don't really exist at all? You can mix and match. Pre-Trib A-Mil, Post-Trib Post-Mil, etc etc. (Armstrongism would fall into pre-Trib Pre-Mil.)
It gets more complicated than this, but I'm not writing a dissertation here. I am just explaining how there are systems.

I ask a very difficult thing of you. There is no way most Armstrongists would so much as entertain the idea of us currently being in the Millennium. They are simply too literal. The church is not the Kingdom of God on earth, they believe, and Jesus is not here, so everything must still be future, and therefore anything pre or current is wiped off the board. The system has become the assumption by which everything else is seen. It is the bias. A bias I was once dialed into myself.
Do you see the assumptions and the bias here? Once dialed-in, a person will force all evidence to fit the system. We use terms like "difficult verses", and we have arguments with others of a different opinion. We tell ourselves how right we are, but deep inside we feel a splinter reminding us something is not quite right after all.

But think for a minute. Given the unbroken track record of prophetic failures going all the way back to Herbert Armstrong predicting the return of Christ in 1936 (we have articles on this, I suggest "All Systems Are Go!"), and given the sheer number of splinter-church members who have their own private views on prophetic interpretation (there is at least one group at every Feast of Tabernacles who everyone knows are the prophecy nerds), therefore perhaps consider the remote possibility that maybe, just maybe, the eschatological system is not so very written in stone after all. Humor me here .... perhaps a reasonable course is to take a look at what other options exist, and why they exist, even though you have a preferred system.

Herbert Armstrong was right sometimes. One thing he was right about was when he said, "A false starting point leads to false conclusions." Or something like that. I paraphrase. At any rate, it's true! He certainly came to many false conclusions because of some false assumption picked up along the way (we have articles on this, too, I suggest "An Inconvenient Plain Truth"). As the shepherd goes, so do the sheep. So, his followers have also come to many false conclusions. How many absolutely certain immediate returns of Christ has Dave Pack alone come up with in just the past couple years? Legion. Yet his dates come and go like the breeze. Why do you suppose that is? Because he has the right equation? The right equation led him to so very many incorrect conclusions? No. Worse still, it's system-wide. These failures have been happening since the Great Disappointment in 1843. Armstrong's system comes directly from William Miller's after all. But look here, it's not just the leadership, like the Packs or the Weinlands or the Thiels. It's the people in the seats, too. I've been hearing over my entire lifetime, "Three or four more years!" Over the years, I've heard more private explanations of prophecy and when Jesus is going to return than I can count. I spent most of my time at the Feast of Tabernacles with the prophecy nerds (and go-karting). Would a fully correct and functional equation keep coming to such incorrect conclusions across the board like this? Or does the evidence cry out to us that there was a false starting point? Would it not make more sense that something somewhere is off? And if so, would it not be reasonable to compare and contrast against other options?

Reviewing isn't the same thing as throwing everything you have in the garbage bin. As we always used to say, "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater." (I cringe typing that out.) I'm not advocating throwing things out. Quite the opposite! Look, keep your preference. Just understand what alternatives exist and why they exist is all I'm suggesting.

To be bluntly honest with you, I don't know which eschatological system is right any more than anyone else here below. Sure, I have a favorite, but I'm not betting the farm on it. For me to say, "throw out pre-Trib Pre-Mil because it's false," would be to grossly misrepresent my case. I started out saying as much. Read the third paragraph again. Keep your options open. I think that is the best and wisest course. Whichever way it plays out, it would be a shame to be taken off guard because I was staring intently in the wrong direction.

What might really bake your noodle is for me to suggest more than one system could be correct. Because it's possible things could play out in two ways. Think about it. In the Old Covenant period, there was a greater end time, with the statue dream and multiple empires, and there was a final end time in 70-136 AD. That could happen again.

Keep in mind what I've said here many times before: ALL prophetic interpretation is speculation. I'm not against speculation, but I definitely am against elevating speculation into doctrine. Don't let your eschatological systems, assumptions, and bias be your blind spot.

Once And Future Kingdom - Part I

Today, I am starting a two-part series on the Kingdom of God. This series goes hand-in-hand with my post "Just What Do You Mean ... Gospel?". The Kingdom and the Gospel are inseparable, are they not?

I didn't sit down intending to write today's article. What you are reading grew out of a couple introductory paragraphs that were meant to build toward the main topic which we will get to next time. A few paragraphs turned into an entire post. Then I had to split it up.

I want to remind you what the COG splinters believe about the Gospel:

"Notice, Jesus said, 'Believe THE GOSPEL!'
WHAT Gospel? The one He was proclaiming - 'the Gospel of the Kingdom of God.'"
...
"The Gospel of Jesus Christ is NOT man's gospel ABOUT THE PERSON of Christ. It is CHRIST'S Gospel - the Gospel Jesus PREACHED - the Gospel God SENT by Him, and therefore it is also called, in Scripture, the Gospel of God. The Gospel of God is God's GOSPEL - His Message - His Good News which He sent by Jesus."
-Herbert Armstrong, "What Is The True Gospel?", p. 6, 1972

In short, the Gospel God gave is about the future Kingdom of God.
There are some qualities about the Kingdom that the booklet specifies:

• It isn't some condition you feel in your heart.
• You must be resurrected into it, which doesn't occur until Jesus returns.
• It is a single, world-ruling entity.

The Kingdom of God in Armstrongism is all about prophecy and law. It is almost entirely a situation in the future. Perhaps the not-so-distant future for us, but undeniably the far distant future to those people alive when Jesus preached about it two millennia ago. It was as far from them in their future as Abraham was in their past - but they didn't know that because they didn't know when it would be. I came up with a purposefully absurd phrase that exaggerates the claims in order to illustrate the issue: "Good News, everyone! I will be back in a few thousand years with more of the same." News like that would not seem so very good. Least of all to Jews in the diaspora.

So many questions come to mind.
Was there no message for the people of that day, or us for that matter, now, today, immediately, besides, "Keep Sabbath-ing until I get back"? Is the Kingdom of God purely a future item? What of the verses that say the Kingdom is at hand? If it is not entirely in the future, then what is the Kingdom now? Are we in it now or not?

The Gospel goes hand-in-hand with the Kingdom, I do not deny this. I only claim the Kingdom is not the whole Gospel message. But what is the Kingdom? And what is the message for the first century, and by extension for us today? These are the types of things I want to explore in this series.

Today, we will explore some issues and puzzles with the Kingdom of God. Next time, we will get to the message for the first century.

THREE ISSUES AT HAND

Let us explore some issues with the Kingdom of God. There are some contradictions here. Don't brand me an enemy of Christ for using that word just yet. I will give you the end of the story at the start: they are only contradictions if you unquestioningly accept the timing and claims of Armstrongism. That ending probably didn't make it much better for some of you. Well, I think we can clear all of this up. But it won't do any good to clear up a problem if we don't look at it first.

Issue #1: When?

First, was it imminent, or distant?

Jesus said multiple times that the Kingdom was at hand (MAT. 3: 2; 4: 17; 10: 7). And that's just a short list. There are more. Let's look closely at Matthew 4: 17:

(MAT. 4: 17) From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

This verse makes it sound like "the Kingdom is at hand" was a regular message of His. If it was, then there could be countless unrecorded times when He said the Kingdom was 'at hand'. It changes things quite a bit if the regular message was not just "the Kingdom of God" but "the Kingdom of God is at hand."

Does "at hand" refer to that time or our future? Do we have to use some odd turn of phrase to make sense of it, such as "a thousand years to God is like a day, so really it was only two days away"? As if you have Ben Kenobi there saying, "It is at hand ...from a certain point of view."

But!

There are other verses that make the Kingdom look far away. According to Herbert Armstrong, there was no Gospel in our Lord's birth, nor His death, nor His person, but only in a the Kingdom that would not come until Jesus returned. "Good news, everyone! I will be back in a few thousand years..." To be fair, it's not like that is entirely baseless. There are in fact several verses that place the Kingdom at His return. I hope you don't mind if I do not go through them here. I will assume we are all already familiar.

Does that mean it is only a thing of the future? Is there no portion at all for us now?

The timing is an issue.

Issue #2: Whose?

Second, to whom does the Kingdom belong - the Father, the Son, or us?

We have several other verses where Jesus says the Kingdom belongs to His Father, for example Matthew 13:43, and 26: 29.

So, the Kingdom belongs to the Father.

But!

In John 18: 36 , Jesus says, "My Kingdom"? He does it again in Luke:

(LUK. 22: 29) And I bestow [present tense] upon you [that's us] a kingdom, just as My Father bestowed [past tense] one upon Me.

I pointed out the verb tense for a reason. Don't ignore those.
Paul also says it in Collosians:

(COL. 1: 13) He [the Father] has delivered [past tense] us from the power of darkness and conveyed [past tense] us into the kingdom of the Son of His love...

So, the Kingdom belongs to Jesus already, past tense. And we are delivered into it already, past tense. So it's His? And we're in it? And it's ours?

According to Armstrongism, the Kingdom isn't His. Not yet, anyway. The Kingdom won't be handed to Him until His second coming. That is because Armstrongism believes Daniel 7: 13-14 shows Jesus receiving the Kingdom from the Father, while verses 11-12 set the time at the end times. Nor are we in it because we have to be resurrected to be in it. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom. All of this talk about present tense and past tense is really just poetry that actually mean future tense. But does it?

So, it's the Fathers, and Jesus', and ours? Whose Kingdom is it anyway? Are these all just references to the far future?

Possession is an issue.

Issue #3: Where?

Third, where is this Kingdom anyway, and who are its citizens?

Jesus says the Kingdom is not of this world. Jesus says the phrase "Kingdom of Heaven" 45 times in the Gospel of Matthew. That is the entire Gospel according to Herbert, no? That His Kingdom is not here but is going to be coming here. The "coming Kingdom of God". The World Tomorrow.

Jesus says "of heaven" often, but never "of earth" nor "of heaven and earth". The Lord's Prayer does say "Thy Kingdom come" does it not?

Armstrong spent several words explaining how flesh and blood cannot inherit this Kingdom (I COR. 15: 50), and how we must be born again as spirit to participate, which means resurrected (JON. 3: 1-8).

But!

We also have several references to the Kingdom here on earth. Just for two examples:

(MAT. 12: 28b) ...surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.
(LUK. 10: 9) And heal the sick there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’

Near? Upon? Heaven?

This causes people to think, "Well, Jesus has not returned yet, and I believe in soul-sleep (that is a critical factor here, but I won't get into it today), so it must still mean that the message is for the future. Maybe it was only present while Jesus was present."
OK. A reasonable line of thinking given the belief system.
But it doesn't explain how we are delivered into it now, or how it is given to us now, as Luke and Paul clearly wrote. It only explains how it can be here at the second coming. It takes all past and present tense and makes them future. Plus, it actively combats the idea that the church (all the people who repent and believe) are citizens of the Kingdom right now - even while at the very same time maintaining the church are citizens of that Kingdom now. They aren't, but they are.

And if that isn't enough, these three conditions are placed on the Kingdom:

1. Not physical but spirit beings,
2. Who believe and repent,
3. And aren't of this world.

But when Jesus returns at the start of the Millennial period, look at the Kingdom:

1. Physical beings,
2. Who might believe and might have repented,
3. On earth.

How can Herbert Armstrong emphasize that physical beings cannot participate in the Kingdom, then immediately turn right around and say Jesus will bring the Kingdom to physical beings at the start of the Millennial Period? To reiterate: Flesh and blood cannot be in the Kingdom, but flesh and blood will be in the Kingdom. How?
Don't go saying we will find out who was really in it at the end. No, they will all be citizens in it. Despite all the avoiding pork and the Sabbath-ing that are supposedly going to bring universal peace, many will simply throw it all away when they are tempted.

So, is it spirit or flesh? Is it the church or not? Is it on earth or in heaven? Is it in heaven now but here only later on?

Location is a problem.

I PROPOSE A SOLUTION

We have problems in timing, possession, and location. What can the answer to these issues be? I wish to propose to you a solution.

The answer: it's all of the above.

The Kingdom is now and future. The Kingdom is spirit and physical. The Kingdom is the Father's, the Son's, and ours. The Kingdom is in heaven and on earth. There is no either/or. It's both/and. Those aren't contradictions at all. They are all true.

I know you are inherently disappointed with my proposal. You are saying my solution is also contradictory. That's because you are still thinking either/or. It hasn't sunk in yet. The Armstrongist solution to the three issues is prophecy and law. If we kick this can down the road, we can ignore the issues. That's not what I am proposing, though. I am proposing that we ditch the either/or in favor of both/and. One does not need to preclude the other.

Still unconvinced? Hear me out, please. There is a little more to it than just this. I have not given you my entire solution yet. There is a second part. As a bonus, I do honestly think most of you already believe it.

ONCE AND FUTURE KINGDOM

I fully admit and agree that when we look around at the miserable conditions of the "push-button leisure world" of today, we wonder where God could possibly be hiding. I pray for His will to at long last be done on earth as it is in heaven, just like you. But He is here. Like a still, small voice. All Christians believe this.

As a Westerner, I am not huge on both/and reasoning. Westerners are either/or folk. In fact, I personally tend to be a pessimist. Perhaps, when I get in a mood, I am best described as a neither/nor. But in this case it just makes sense, once you fully understand what I'm saying. Emphasis on fully.

The trick here is to let go of Herbert Armstrong's demand that the Gospel is only for some future time, and just let the Gospel also be about who Jesus is and what He accomplished. Precisely as we saw in the post "Just What Do You Mean ... Gospel?" Let the Gospel be the full message that it is.

I know that is a lot to ask.

If Jesus only went around preaching the "far future Kingdom of God" as His Gospel, then why go around regularly preaching the imminent Kingdom of heaven? The Armstrongist version makes it a bait and switch. It isn't! Jesus preached that way because it in fact was imminent. His message was a Kingdom at hand because it was at hand. There is no need to explain it away with things like, "It was at hand only while He was here."

"But, the Millennium and peace and holy days in Jerusalem..." I hear someone saying. Yes. I know that is the picture you have in your mind of what the Kingdom is like. Kingdom = paradise. I do not ask you to throw that out. Just set it aside for now, briefly.

No one involved in this discussion claims the Kingdom of Heaven is of Heaven only, and will never be of this world, ever. In Armstrongism that isn't true because it's coming here, to earth, where there are physical people. And it will be like that for 1,000 years. If Jesus is coming to bring the Kingdom to earth (and He is) then it will be of this world at some point (and it will). That's the whole Gospel according to Herbert. We all accept the Kingdom can be in Heaven and here.

But I propose it makes more sense that the Kingdom is here now, since the Holy Spirit is here now, and we are God's Temple now, and we are citizens of the Kingdom now. All of these are here and all of these are now. The church is the body of Christ now (I COR. 12: 27). One body, yet still individuals. It's both! How can we be the body of Christ, yet Christ is not here? He is here! The Son is here and the Spirit is here. Now. Today. Do you think you were called to Christianity because God is away on a far journey and needs you to stand in? He was personally involved in your life to bring you to faith, was He not? So, if the Kingdom is here while He is here, then it is here..
...yet not fully here.

Do you still think what I am proposing makes no sense? I'll tell you what makes no sense, dear reader. Claiming the Kingdom of God can only be here while Christ is here, and yet He is here - in us - while maintaining Christ and the Kingdom are not here because He isn't here. That either/or thinking is what makes no sense.

If God is here now (and He is), because we are His body now (and we are), and the Spirit is in us (and it is), and we are His Temple now (and we are), and we have citizenship in the Kingdom now (which we do), then the Kingdom is at hand right now for us who love Him. It's both!

Your Minister tells you the church is not the Kingdom on earth. Why? Because that's what the Catholics say? Well, they also say to pray. Are we to reject prayer because it's what the Catholics say to do? Catholics also say the Kingdom will be on earth after the final judgment, don't you know? So, are you forced to reject the coming Kingdom now? Luke and Paul and John all say the church is in the Kingdom. If you recall, even Herbert Armstrong said the church is Kingdom "en eutero". Well, that counts!

How many more things do you need to accept before you accept you are part of the Kingdom now? How many times have you said, "My citizenship is in heaven"? Plenty, I'll wager. Probably every time you skip voting. Realize that you already accept what I'm saying. So, what's the issue?

I know some of you are inherently disappointed with my proposal. We both know merely saying "it's both" is unsatisfying because it doesn't answer everything. How can the Kingdom be of this world yet not of this world, here but not here, ours yet not ours, at the first coming yet at the second? How can it be both/and when it seriously looks either/or? It sounds just as conflicting as the things I mentioned earlier. There is another factor in the equation.

NOW, BUT NOT FULLY

To this point, I have only hinted at the second part of my solution. Let's dig into it in earnest.

Do you reject my solution because flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom? Are you thinking I am ignoring that verse? Have you forgotten your own beliefs? When Jesus returns, flesh and blood will be in the Kingdom for a thousand years. No?
It says flesh and blood cannot inherit, but it does not say flesh and blood cannot be citizens of. There are plenty of citizens in every Kingdom, but only one is going to inherit it. You accept this, too. The key here is to think of it as a process.

Do you recall your Minister teaching you that there is duality in prophecy? Some things in prophecy are fulfilled twice. Yes, you do. I don't even need to give you an example because you're already trying to think of at least one right now. I propose it's the same thing here.

The Kingdom is here now, but it is only partial at this time. When you were an infant, were you any less yourself than you are now? No. There was so much more to come, but you were still completely you. Same with the Kingdom. It is here, now, and we are citizens now, but not fully here now and not fully ours at this time. A little now, a whole lot more later.

Add "a little now with a lot more later" to the "both/and" and you get the whole solution I am proposing.

We yet live on faith and hope now, but we do have a down payment as insurance.

(II COR. 1: 21) Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and has anointed us is God, 22 who also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.

(II COR. 5: 50) Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.

Many things are promised and are partially realized but are not fully realized at this time. The Kingdom is in stark contrast to this world, as our faith should be. But we who have faith are citizens of the Kingdom that is in heaven now. Your life should be a mini Kingdom, right now. Therefore, the Kingdom is in heaven now and on earth now. Yet, the Kingdom is coming in a more concrete, tangible, complete way in the future. The Holy Spirit is our guarantee that when it is fully realized we will be part of it. Yet, not as citizens but as inheritors.

This is precisely the message preached at every Feast of Tabernacles I've ever been to. This is precisely the message behind the word "ambassador". You already believe what I'm saying. I am just presenting it in a different, less contradictory way. All you need to do is give yourself permission to accept the whole Gospel message. It is not just a future Kingdom only, but who He is and what He accomplished - now. That good news is for us! He accomplished those things so we can participate with Him - now. Right now. Today. Only, it's a little now and a lot more later.

It is the once and future kingdom.

This explanation I give you resolves all three contradictions. They are only contradictory in the first place when the Gospel butts heads with Herbert Armstrong's Adventist demands for prophecy.

If the "prophecy and law" view is to be believed, everything that looks like it refers to the here and now is just a message about the there and then. The world tomorrow. There was no immediate good news for the world today, let alone the first century, other than, "When you are resurrected, things will be better ...IF you Sabbath hard enough." That's not very good news. There is no substance to the here and now. The here and now is practically abandoned. Don't vote, don't give to charity, don't try to make a better world or you're fighting against God. The here and now is just metaphoric, or poetic, or something. Despite the deposit of the Holy Spirit, there is no real assurance in that system. Not even for the faithful and repentant. Because we sin, we are all supposed to be surprised when Jesus resurrects us to His Kingdom at His second coming, or else resurrects us to the "second death" later on. "Fantastic news! You have a chance to win!"
I disagree.

The Gospel is about who Jesus is and what He already accomplished, PLUS what He will yet accomplish. It's about assurance in faith and hope now, PLUS a fuller, tangible, in-hand realization of what has been promised in the future. It's about citizenship now, PLUS inheritance in the future. It's here with us now until we are there with it then. It is not perfect now but it will be more perfect in the future.
It's both/and. A little now, a lot later.

And in the far, far future, it will be even more perfect still!

(I COR. 15: 24-28) 24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27 For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

Utter perfection. Amen!

You see, I have not ignored those verses about "of heaven" or "flesh and blood cannot inherit". I have already said, "Jesus says the phrase 'Kingdom of Heaven' 45 times in the Gospel of Matthew." (And "coming Kingdom of God" zero times.) And some of those say, "the Kingdom of heaven is at hand." I did not ignore or discount this truth. I have not ignored Philippians 3: 20, which says "our citizenship is [present tense] in heaven". I also have not ignored are other verses, like Revelation 1: 9, where John says he is a companion in tribulation and kingdom. He and they were in the kingdom 1,900 years ago. It's now. ...but it's also not now. It's both! Because it's a little bit now and a whole lot more later.

(EPH. 2: 19) Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God

CONCLUSION

It is the Son's Kingdom, and our Kingdom, yet it never stops being the Father's Kingdom - at the same time. It's both/and.
If the Son and the Spirit are here, in the church, which is the body of Christ and the Temple of God, then God is here, and where God is there is the Kingdom of God, therefore the Kingdom of God is in heaven and on earth - at the same time. It's both/and.
If the Kingdom was given to the Apostles, and they brought us in, and we yet hope for more to come in the future, then it is now and in the future - at the same time. It's both/and.

Partially at hand now, fully in hand then.
Partially on earth now, fully on earth then.
Partially ours now, fully ours then.

Just like prophecy, the Gospel of the Kingdom of heaven is fulfilled in duality. There is a partial fulfillment followed by a more optimal fulfillment. A type and an antitype.
Is it not the same with the law?
(HEB. 10: 1) For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect.
The Old Covenant law was a shadow of the fulfillment brought by Christ.
Think of your own Christian walk. You were not the person you are, and you are not the person you will become. It's the same thing.

Is it really so unusual when I say the Kingdom we have now is just a shadow of the better fulfillment Jesus will bring when He returns?

I told you - you already believe this.
All you really need to do is let the Gospel be the Gospel.

But there I go with the future again. I want to force our eyes back from the far future, back from the near future, back from our present, and back onto the people of Jesus' day. We need to go to the past.

But this has been quite a post already. I think we should stop here to give everyone a chance to breathe.

In my next post, let's look more closely at the message Jesus gave to the people of His time so we can see how it did apply straight to them, and to see how the message to them has rippling effects on our lives and our calling today. There is so much more to it. There is real meat to it, right now!

For weeks, I've had this need to explore the message to the first century. I started writing this post before I started writing "What Do You Mean ... Gospel?" and that post and this came from thinking about the next post. When I sat down to write, and even after three weeks of writing and editing, what I was doing is working on Part II of this series. I didn't expect today's post to get so big. All of this was supposed to be a couple paragraphs of intro. This wasn't meant to be a two-parter. I haven't even gotten to the topic I intended to write about!

And, completely by accident, this turned out to be a decent post for this time of year, what with the Feast of Tabernacles and all. Bonus!

See you next time. For now, beloved of God, I leave you with a prayer of blessing. May God bless you and open your heart to a more full, more hopeful, more reassuring understanding of your place in His plan and His love.

Once and Future Kingdom Pat II.

 

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

What the "Holy Day Plan of Salvation" Means for You

Last time, we looked at the someone tenuous origins of the traditional Church of God doctrine that the Hebrew holy days represent God's ongoing, progressive plan of salvation for humanity. I also threatened, or rather, promised to explain why I find this doctrine so troubling.

So what's my problem with the holy day “plan”? Besides that it's just a theory passed off as rock-solid, salvific Bible truth? A theory used by many in the COGs to self-righteously disparage what they call "counterfeit Christianity". Those are issues, for sure. But they're not the biggest one.

The COG's teachings on plan of progressive salvation diminishes the significance of Christ's sacrifice and lures believers back into salvation by works, a fact which groups like the United Church of God and others vehemently deny, yet consistently reinforce in their literature.

“The sacrifice of Christ constitutes that important first basic step in God's majestic plan of salvation,” wrote the late John Ross Schroeder in a July 2010 article on the Holy Day plan. “Nonetheless, an subsequent passage in Ephesians shows other essential steps.”




I turned to the passage Schroeder referenced – Ephesians 1:9-10. I don't see any other “essential steps” Christians must take. Let's look at the whole passage, in context. This time, I'm turning to the ESV, because this passage is convoluted, even to me, in the NKJV. I'll emphasize verses 9 and 10 for you.

In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of His will, according to His purpose, which He set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in Him, things in heaven and things on earth.

Hmmm. I don't really see any evidence of Christ's sacrifice being the first step in a progressive salvation plan here. The only thing I really see that rings a bell is the word “plan.” Basically, in this passage, we have God revealing His Son at the appointed time in history, opening our minds to the fact that Jesus was God's Son, redeeming us and forgiving our sins through the shedding of His blood, and eventually setting right the fallen world.

This passage bears almost no resemblance to the COG narrative of this plan, which goes something like this:

1. Jesus died for your sins on Passover. (so far so good).
2. We then put sin out of our lives, which is pictured by the Days of Unleavened Bread. (hmmm.)
3. We receive the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Wait. How did we put sin out of our lives without the Holy Spirit?)
4. Jesus Christ returns at the Feast of Trumpets. (debatable, but it's a possibility)
5. Those who have successfully completed these “essential steps” celebrate their millenial reign during the Feast of Tabernacles (where they have achieved divinity, despite what Isaiah 43:10 says).
6. Satan is put away on the Day of Atonement (wasn't Jesus our Atonement? 1 John 2:2)
7. Humans who never had a chance to learn about God's plan will receive another chance to accept God's way at the Great White Throne Judgement on the Last Great Day (despite 2 Thessalonians 1:8, which tells us Jesus will judge both those who don't know God and didn't follow the gospel at His return).

But I'll admit, UCG leaves the salvific significance component of our works vague. But competing sister splinter COGWA does not. Consider what Jeremy Lallier, a full-time writer for COGWA's Discern magazine, recently wrote on his private Sabbath Thoughts blog for the Feast of Trumpets:

“As Christians, that trumpet will be the moment that defines us for eternity. As our Lord and Savior descends through the skies and voices from the heaven proclaim Him King of kings and Lord of lords, we'll either rise up to meet Him... or we won't. Those are the possibilities. There isn't a third option.”

Wow! You have my attention! That paragraph alone made me sit up two inches straighter in my chair.

“What kind of life did you live? What kind of choices did you have to make along the way? What did you value, and what did you let go of? What did you have to overcome? What aspects of your character changed – and what stayed the same?”

Hmm....

“How did those changes happen? What habits did you develop or break that helped lead to them? Who influenced you – and who did you have to step away from so they'd stop influencing you? What sacrifices did you have to get used to making, and what things were so important you vowed to never let go of them?"'

I'm starting to notice a trend here - a whole lot of "you, you, you" and not a whole lot of "God, God, God." But let's hear him out.

“Keep stepping backward from your future until you get to the present, then connect the dots.

Well, at least he isn't pulling out a sticker chart. Yet.

“Using the tools we've been given, we chart our way to the finish line, plotting out a life that leads to hearing, 'Well done, good and faithful servant.”

Woops. I spoke too soon. I stand corrected.

“This isn't just a thought exercise. Your destiny hangs in the balance. If you want to make sure it's a good one, now's the time to reverse engineer it.”

All right. I've had enough. It's intellectually dishonest, at best, to claim to teach that salvation is a free gift, but then state that we are responsible for plotting our own destiny to a heavenly crown. If we make our own destiny, then we have reason to boast, which directly contradicts scripture:

What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh. For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace, but as debt.  - Romans 4:1-4

I'm glad you brought up Abraham, our COGWA friend would probably say, at this point, in our imaginary debate. Doesn't the Bible tell us that Abraham was justified by his works when he offered Isaac in James 2:21.

Why yes, it does. But is that the whole story? Let's look at the passage rather than a single verse.

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. You see, then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. -  James 2:21-24

Abraham's true faith was confirmed when he attempted to sacrifice Isaac upon the altar in Genesis 22. But his faith was accounted to him for righteousness – God justified him – much earlier, in Genesis 15, even according to James. His decision in Genesis 22 was evidence of what happened in Genesis 15.

And what kind of life did Abraham live? What kind of choices did he make along the way? What aspects of his character changed, and what stayed the same? Let's see. Abraham made some good choices. He left Ur. He rescued Lot, and then let him have his pick of the land. He attempted to sacrifice his son when God told him to do so. He also lied about his wife to try to save his skin. Twice. Once was even after God “counted him righteous.” He doubted God. He fathered a child with Hagar.

If we plotted and charted Abraham's life, what kind of picture would we see? Someone who secured his own destiny through grit and determination? Or a sinner who, like Paul, warred against his nature throughout his life and relied upon the grace and mercy of his Creator? What about YOUR life?

There are many reasons that Christians should live godly lives:

1. We are bondservants of the Lord purchased with His blood.

For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's. - 1 Corinthians 6:20

2. Since we have died to sin and have been raised  with Christ, we are living sacrifices.

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is good and acceptable and the perfect will of God. - Romans 12:1

3. We are representatives of God's kingdom.

Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given s the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed us to the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God. - 2 Corinthians 5:18-20

4. To witness against those who mock us.

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear; having a good conscience, that when they defame you as evildoers, those who revile your good conduct in Christ may be ashamed. 
- 1 Peter 3:15-16

5. To turn others to God

You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.
- Matthew 5:14-16

There are these reasons, and many more. But noticeably absent is the goal of securing our entrance into God's Kingdom through an elaborate, metaphysical game of connect-the-dots. We can neither obtain nor maintain that destiny.

This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?   - Galatians 3:2-3

We can't reverse engineer, connect the dots or force out enough fruit to sell for a ticket into God's kingdom. Thankfully, the ticket is free and the fruit is a by-product, or evidence that we are connected to the True Vine. With that assurance, we can rest in Christ, knowing that He is the author and finisher of our faith.

A holy day plan that reveals an ongoing “plan of salvation” sounds tidy, inspiring, even desirable. On paper. But in real life, a checklist of “essential steps” means that you must achieve in order to progress to the next step. And if you don't achieve enough by the time the last step comes, then you fail.

Whether it's a progressive holy day plan, Lallier's subtle “we'll either rise up and meet Him... or we won't” or Herbert Armstrong's deity, who aborts Christians who don't grow enough, the message and theology are the same. Thankfully, they're not true. Thanks be God for His indescribable gift!

For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. Ephesians 2:8-10.

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

Brexit - Were the COG Prophets Right?

One day after the Brexit vote, various Armstrongist leaders, prophets, and talking heads are publishing mostly pre-written statements about the future implications of Britain leaving the EU. For a good idea on what they're already saying, read Banned by HWA article "Was He Right?" Years ago, it was foretold that Britain would leave the EU, then Germany would rise and enslave us all. All of Armstrongism watched the Brexit with great anticipation, hoping after decades of worrisome prophetic failure that finally they can hold their heads high and say with confidence, "We were right!" It's a much needed boost of confidence for an ailing system.

But we have to ask - were they right?

Let's briefly review some of the details that are being left out in all this rush to proclaim victory over the mapping out of the end times.

Don't forget for one moment that Armstrongism comes out of Ellen G. White's Seventh Day Adventist movement, and that was born in the prophetic failures of William Miller. A long and storied past of false prophecy is in the DNA of Armstongism.

Herbert Armstrong, “the founder, Pastor General, and spiritual and temporal leader” of the Church of God on earth had barely just incorporated the Radio Church of God (later the Worldwide Church of God) when he began publishing his false prophecies that Christ would return in 1936. He did it again in World War II. And again in the early 1970s. Then Christ was to return in the 1980's. Then by the end of the 20th century. But he never once even hinted that he might be wrong. Instead, he claimed no association with being a prophet at all. Those exceedingly detailed claims spoken under the authority of God were all just educated guesses, in effect. Then he tried to bury the past. People were told to burn the old material which contained the errors. All then proceeded as normal with new predictions. "All Systems Go!"

This pattern of false prophecy and cover-up continues to this very day under the guidance of Herbert Armstrong's many "one true" successors. A fabulous example is Ron Weinland's spectacular failure with "2008: God's Final Witness." In summary, we were all supposed to begin dying in 2008. "But wait," you say, "It's 2016." Correct. I don't want to ruin the end of the book for you, but [SPOILER ALERT] Ron got the predictions right from God and transmitted them to us all accurately, but God was lying in order to fool Satan. [END SPOILER] Well, if you can't blame God who can you blame?
He's still at it even now. For a great deal more, I highly recommend you read our friend Mike's blog about the False Prophet Ron Weinland.

Don't be so surprised by this. Armstrongism has a very long history of prophesying something that never comes to pass, moving the goal posts, then proceeding forward as if they were right all along. We've written about it more than once before (eg. Herbert W Armstrong's Doctrine and Fruit, An Inconvenient Plain Truth, All Systems Are Go, or read our Categories page for many more). The story ends the same every time with wait and see. And tithe.

Why dredge up this ugly past? Because in order to properly understand the current clucking about Brexit, you absolutely must know there's a lot more to it - decades more - than just Britain leaving the EU. If you don't know your history, you won't know that Britain leaving the EU isn't even what was supposed to happen in the first place.

If we all recall, in the original version of prophecy there was no EU. It was the early 1930s and no one ever dreamed that an EU was even possible. In the original version, a ten nation group from somewhere in the old Holy Roman Empire was simply going to run amok then Jesus would return. Next, Mussolini was going to become the Beast. Then Hitler was to be the Beast. Then Hitler supposedly went into hiding and would re-emerge as the Beast. There was no EU. There was no Brentrance let alone a Brexit.

In the 1960s it began to become clear that the new European trade agreements were more than just a series of trade agreements. It didn't take a prophet to see that the point was political unity to prevent World War III. What was the reliable prophecy from that time? Britain was never supposed to join in the first place. They might float around the edges, but since this political union was to be the Beast we couldn't have "Ephriam" join in. (For those of you who are somehow unaware, Herbert Armstrong was deeply involved in British Israelism aka. Anglo Israelism. In Armstrongism, England is the modern identity of the ancient Israelite tribe of Ephraim.)

But by the mid-1970's Britain did join. Emergency! It was now necessary that the only people on earth who knew what the future would be like should change their story yet again. In the new version, Britain was going to leave the EU and then the end would come.

This is where we find ourselves today. This is what all the crowing is about. So "We were right!" ...after several attempts. One thing right, out of Lord knows how many wrong things. But are the COG prophets right? We at ABD are not impressed.

The issue isn't just in the past. Going forward is an issue as well. A few additional details come to mind and they are rather important.

• After Brexit there will still be 27 EU nations. One down, 17 left to go to hit that correct ten-nation Beast power. Technically speaking it's really eleven nations, because ten nations are supposed to ally themselves under Germany. 10 + 1 = 11. 16 nations left to go.
• The Beast power can't just include Germany, it has to be formed by Germany and dominated by Germany. In other words the whole EU needs to be dissolved and a new ten-nation combine needs to be formed. To put it another way: Britain left the EU -- so what?
• These ten nations can't just be ten random nations surrounding Germany. They have to be mainly nations that are not on the list of British Isreal nations of western and northern Europe (the Beast isn't Israelite). For example France can't be a partner with Germany as France is the modern identity of the ancient Israelite tribe of Reuben. Or Denmark can't be a partner because Demnark is the modern identity of the ancient Israelite tribe of Dan. (Something we're not even supposed to be able to find out until the very end.) To put it another way: the entire EU -- so what?
• The Beast power can't just be Germany in the lead, either. It has to be a singular ultra-charismatic human being who leads Germany who leads the ten other nations.
• This Beast king must be closely partnered with the Pope and at least pretend to be Catholic himself and convert the majority of the world to Catholicism. In an increasingly secular post-Protestant Europe where Catholicism in particular is not very popular and waves of Muslim immigrants arrive daily, this point is going to be particularly difficult to pull off.
• This whole mess is supposed to happen quickly and it's only supposed to happen at the end. It's supposed to take the world by surprise, not drag out over several decades (or centuries as the case is). And then the end shall come.
• The ten nations under Germany in association with Vatican City are supposed to enslave Britain, Australia, and the entire North American continent - and then still have enough military wherewithal to turn and attack Russia while a 200 million strong Chinese army marauds its way across the Middle East. I'm no military tactician myself, but as it stands the entire EU doesn't seem capable to conquer even one of these things let alone all of them.

We could go on and on this way. The point is Britain leaving the EU isn't the whole story, and getting lucky on a small fraction of the story (after several iterations) isn't the same as being prophetically accurate.

If this were a math problem, would the teacher grade them correct? No. If a prophet from another religion got only this much right, would we say they were sent by God? No. In what other area of life would anyone with this track record still hold any credibility at all? The only place that comes to my mind is in the U.S. Federal Government. <--- FAR cry from God there. This reminds me of a movie quote that goes like this, "60% of the time, it works every time." Only instead of 60% it's somewhere closer to 2%. And I'm being generous. Does "2% of the time, we're right every time," make sense to you? Because it doesn't to me. One certainly cannot claim "we were right therefore we're God's one true church" and at the same time expect us all to ignore all the overwhelming majority of the time when they weren't. And we are supposed to base our current and future plans, hopes, and dreams on this??

Will Brexit have powerful and far-reaching implications for the world? Yes. That much is inevitable. And I'm not saying that as any form of prophecy. I'm saying that because history proves it's unavoidable. Could it lead to war? It might; it might not. Lots of lesser things have. Lots of greater things have not. Should you worry about it? No. All of this entire mess regarding false prophecy is born in fear and worry. Armstrongists tend to dislike the world and they would rather it finally just go away. They obsess over bad news because it feeds their desperate hope that the end is nigh, even at the door.

But don't be like that. Love your neighbor as yourself. And don't fear. Just trust! Not in COG false prophets, nor us here, but in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Believe in Jesus and love your neighbor. That's your work as a Christian.

There is much more we here at ABD have said and could yet say on this topic. But does what we have seen make Herbert Armstrong or any of the other COG prophets right? When you consider the context and the changes and the details, the answer is a resounding NO!

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

What's Written Between the Lines in LCG's "Tomorrow's World"?

Man, LCG. You got me again. I don’t know how you do it. Maybe it’s the attractive mushroom cloud on the cover of your magazine. Maybe I have mommy guilt because I’ve let my emergency canned food supply dwindle. Either way, when the November-December issue of the Living Church of God’s Tomorrow’s World arrived in the mail this week, I couldn’t resist turning to the issue’s featured story, “Are You Ready for Christ’s Return?”

The thing I enjoyed most about this article was that it never actually mentioned how to be ready for Christ’s return. Instead, the author, Richard Ames, detailed the terrifying events that will lead up to the Battle of Armageddon - in between heart-warming pictures of fiery oil wells and abandoned gas masks lying in piles of rubble.

Now, I don’t mean to imply I think there’s a way to be physically prepared for the Second Coming. Bottled water, food rations, whatever – it isn’t going to cut it. But I would assume there would be some spiritual admonition given here, like “start keeping the Sabbath,” “Throw out your Christmas decorations” or even something vague like “Get right with God.” But there was none of that. It didn’t even mention contacting LCG.  Ames totally missed the point.

Unless that wasn’t the point.

Once again, I’m inclined to believe that this article is largely intended to scare LCG’s disgruntled membership into staying with the embattled organization. Sure, it might frighten a few anxious newcomers into Rod Meredith’s cold, clammy embrace. But with no mention of the Sabbath, Holy Days or other standard COG doctrines, my guess is it’s intended for folks who already agree on these points.

When you consider that, just pages earlier in the magazine, Meredith warns that “within the next several years, a genuine ‘spirit’ war will break out,” after which Satan will finally be cast into the bottomless pit, we can almost certainly conclude the target audience is LCG members who are ready to jump ship. Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines “several” as more than two - but not very many more - which seems to undermine Meredith’s longstanding teaching that Christians cement their  salvation through a lifetime of obedience.  Are we to believe a human who joins LCG this year could prove him or herself trustworthy “not to become another Satan,” as the COGs teach, in just a few short years? Hardly. Fresh fish don’t seem to be his target.

Honestly, I struggled to find a true “action point” that would get me “ready” for Christ’s return. Ames warned that that our world will experience increasingly severe weather extremes “unless we wholeheartedly return to God.” Can’t do much more than I’m already doing with that one, although I’m sure Ames would disagree.  Still, I can’t do anything about the rest of humanity. What else? I should “wake up and heed what is happening around the world.” Check. “Be spiritually alert for signs of Jesus Christ’s second coming.” “Look forward to His return with confidence, hope and faith.” Besides that? Have a satchel packed for Petra? Buy extra can openers? A portable water filter? Anything?

And this is why I suspect this is article is intended more to control than to inform. It’s certainly in line with LCG’s track record and modus operandi: Don't look around. Don't ask questions. Don't prayerfully consider why God has led you to this blog. If it doesn't come out of Charlotte, it's heresy. 

Ames did have ONE helpful recommendations - to check up on LCG and all preachers by reading my Bible. Luckily, my “false Christian” preacher recently gave a message on the end times. That makes my job easy. Ok, Richard. Let’s see how my pastor is misleading me and the rest of his flock about Christ’s return. These are quotes directly from the sermon transcript:

“It (the Day of the Lord) will include what the Bible calls the Great Tribulation.  That's a seven-year period during which the anti-Christ will rule the earth as a self-proclaimed god.  And during the second half of those seven years, God will begin to pour out His wrath upon the earth.  That's part of the Day of the Lord.  The Day of the Lord also  includes the coming of Jesus Christ.  He'll come to the earth, and He'll rule on a throne in Jerusalem, and for a thousand years, Jesus Christ will rule the earth.  The Bible talks about that, not only in the book of Revelation, but also in Isaiah and other places in the Old Testament.” (Revelation 11:2; 13:5, Daniel 8:19, Daniel 12:7, Revelation 6, Revelation 8, Revelation 16, Revelation 20)

(Note: The COGs dispute that the Tribulation will be 7 years but agree that the destructive phase, when God pours out His wrath, will be a period of about 3-1/2 years)

“Now, you drive up to a railroad crossing, and as you drive up to that railroad crossing, the crossbars come down, the bells begin to ring, the lights are flashing, and you see the train coming  down the line.  When the train comes and crosses in front of your car, when you see that engine coming, there is something that you know for certain.  Now, think about this: When you see the engine coming, there's one thing you know for certain.  Here's what it is: Eventually, the last car on that train will pass by.  Would you agree with me on that?  If you see the engine, eventually, you're going to see the last car.  Now, it may come in five cars, or it may be 10 cars down the line, or it could be 100 cars down the line.  You don't know how long that train's going to be.  But eventually, the last train is going to come.  It's coming.  The Bible says the Day of the Lord comes.  It is coming.  It is certain.  It may come in 10 years.  It may come in 100 years.  It may come in 1,000 years.  It may come in 10,000 years.  I believe it's coming very soon, very shortly, but it is coming.  Time on earth is running out.  The Day of the Lord is coming.  The end of time is coming." (Matthew 24:32-33; 36)

“Do you know something?  The Bible shows us that the people who ridicule us or scoff at us or make fun of us because we believe that Jesus is coming and that judgment is coming and that the end is coming, those people themselves, and their mockery, is a sign that judgment is coming.  Look in your Bible over in 2 Peter, chapter 3.  I want you to see what the Bible has to say.  The Bible says that one of the signs of the end times is that people will mock those who believe that the end times are coming.  Isn't that something?  Look in 2 Peter, chapter 3, beginning in verse 3.  This is a picture of the world today.” (2 Peter 3:3)

Wow. That guy has some nerve. What twisting of God's Word. What distortions of scripture. I guess everyone outside LCG, certainly everyone outside the COGs, is totally deceived about Christ's return. I guess he's also deceived when he reads the following: 

(2 Peter 3:9)  “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.”

Now wait a minute. Why would Jesus delaying His coming keep anyone from perishing? And how is this whole “perishing” thing necessarily a bad thing, eternally speaking? Why would He be concerned whether as many people as possible come to repentance before He returns? Wouldn’t they just come up in the second resurrection and get their chance to repent and accept God’s way? Out of all the Armstrongist teachings I was raised with, this is the one I desperately want to be true.  But the more I study, the more I come across stuff like this: 

(Hebrews 9:27) And as it is appointed for men to die once, then after this the judgment.

My pastor makes his reason for speaking on this topic clear - he cares about your eternal destiny:

“Why would God choose to warn us about the Day of the Lord?  Why would He choose to warn us about judgment? Does He do it to scare us?  Does he do it to frighten us?  Does He do it because He has a bad intent toward us?  No.  He warns us against the Day of the Lord, and He warns us against His judgment, because He does not want you to experience judgment and condemnation at the Day of the Lord."

You can nitpick him on the rapture (a theory on which I'm undecided) or scoff at him because he thinks unbelievers will go to hell immediately after they die (a theory which gains more credibility the more I look at it) rather than rising in a second resurrection. But in this discussion, my pastor, Ames and Meredith are all in agreement that the saints will rise; that Christ will return; that there will be a real Armageddon; and that there is a real hell. They're mostly in disagreement about the timing.  

You can write off my pastor and others like him in the "so-called" Christian world as deceived loons because they disagree with the COGs about timing. But at least they are forthcoming about their motivations for preaching about the end times: they hope you will avoid the judgment and repent, place your full faith in Jesus Christ's sacrifice for salvation and then grow to be more like Him in the time you have. What is Richard Ames' reason for publishing his article? It's not to get anyone ready for Christ's return. It's not to implore them to leave "false" Christianity. So what is it? You can be sure they're not just spending their dwindling tithe dollars for the fun of it.

If you are happy in LCG, stay. If you believe it is God’s true church and you see the fruit of the Spirit there (Galatians 5:22-23), then stay. If you admire your leaders, aspire to be like them and desire the kinds of outcomes in your life that their conduct has produced in theirs, (Hebrews 13:7), then stay.  But don’t stay because Rod Meredith and Richard Ames tell you that anything outside LCG is Sodom and Gomorrah. Because they hint that the end is imminent, and that you just have to endure the miserable environment they’ve created a couple more years. Or risk the Lake of Fire. 

Don’t let Rod and his henchmen bully you. You are more than a tithe check. You are more than a backside in a chair, or a number LCG gets to claim in the ongoing COG grudge match for the most members. You are a human being. Jesus loved you enough to die a brutal death for you on the cross. And He still loves you that much today. Any message about the judgment or the terrifying times to come must be rooted in that love. That love is the reason the Lord gave us those sobering passages of Scripture in the first place. To reassure those who are His that He is still in control, no matter what unfolds on earth. To plead with those who are not yet His to turn to Him while they still can. Any message about Armageddon that is not grounded in God's love for you is nothing more than an attempt to scare you, manipulate you and control you.

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

Thank You For The Response

There was a good response during the 5 days the book "Bible Prophecy - God's Agenda and Your Part In It" was available free on Amazon. Books downloaded all over the plane; besides the USA, some went to the UK, Germany and India etc. I couldn't be more pleased. ABD writers don't write to get anything other than a sense of being of some help to some one. So I can legitimately say thank you to those who read ABD articles or take a free e-book. When my wife first started this blog, I had never intended to write anything for public consumption, but she asked me to help her and I couldn't say no. There are readers from every continent, and not too infrequently from non-Christian nations. 

 

With what is now occurring in Israel, it is time for people everywhere to make themselves aware of where we are in prophecy, as well as get right with God by joining in with Christ in the New Covenant. No we can't know when the hour of Christ's return is, but we can know the season. It's interesting how the person who reviewed my book got the idea that I set dates. I appreciated the review, but I stated clearly that various future schedules are speculative. I'd just like to make that point clear. It's the setting of dates (and other such nonsense) that precipitated the creation of ABD in the first place. We are surely in the season, but the purveyor  alarm fatigue have been very successful in dulling receptivity to prophecy. My hope is that we all resist this and do similarly to what the Jewish people did for so many centuries and say: "next year with Christ Jesus in his kingdom."

************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; ) Acts 17:11
************

Bible Prophecy – God's Agenda and Your Part in It – is again free

My book "Bible Prophecy – God's Agenda and Your Part in It" is currently free on Amazon for five days, from July 9, 2014 to July 13, 2014.

This book began as an article on ABD but kept getting bigger to where it made more sense to put it on Amazon as a unit. This meant I couldn't use my pen name, in case the "Glen Paul Erickson" instead of 'Luc" on the cover pic is confusing.

2Tim 4:8 says: "Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day--and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing." This makes it clear that we aren't to forget about the coming of Christ as is so often the case.

The Jewish people ended their Passover Seder (and said among themselves at other occasions) “next year in Jerusalem.” This was a hope built on a promise. And though it seemed like it would never happen, it did. The Jewish nation was reborn, however impossible the world said it was. Interestingly, they never let the hope interfere with their normal activities and responsibilities. Those who believe in Jesus as Lord and messiah have a similar promise: Luk 21:28 “When these things” (Jesus had been describing) “begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near."  Christians, to the largest extent, seem not to consider this important. Not that I blame them. I told my wife's eldest daughter about what my book was about and she said that she and her family were no longer interested in such things. She was kept informed about the whole Ron Weinland charade of prophet-hood and was told to expect the Lord with urgent appeals for her recognition of the man as legitimate. Now she doesn't want to hear such “nonsense.”

      

I wrote an article at the time to make the point that such deception, as Weinland was trying to lure people into, had just the above described effect. I compared it to the dropping of loads of aluminum foil by the allies during WW2 to confuse German radar. The Christian's radars have indeed been confused. The season has arrived for the bride to gather her maidens and become vigilant for the arrival of the bridegroom. The deceivers have won a victory. Many like Ron Weinland have won a victory for the enemy, rather intended or not. Some no longer say: next year with Christ, and a relative few appear interested in prophecy. It has, to so large an extent, become the sphere of the mentally ill and paranoid; at least this is how popular media presents people who pursue such interests.

I never bought what Ron Weinland was selling because of having studied and pondered the prophetic writings for 40 years. Because I didn't arrive at my eschatological conclusions based on any accepted line of reasoning, most of which have been highly influenced by the paradigm of the reformation period which sought to demonize the Catholic Church.  I do see things differently. For example: I see the prophecy of twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings as specifying the exact date of the Jewish regaining of the Temple mount in 1967 because the word translated 'reconsicrated' in Dan 8:14  merely means to make something right; (He said to me, "It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated."). The word translated 'reconsecrated' is H6663  tsadaq  tsaw-dak'a primitive root; to be (causatively, make) right (in a moral or forensic sense). The word sanctuary actually means holy place: H6944  qodesh  ko'-desh from H6942; sacred place or thing; rarely abstract, sanctity. Out of 168 times the word is used in scripture, it only refers to the “sanctuary' 4 times; 98 time it simply means “holiness,” 

The timeline of 2,300 evenings and mornings begins in 333 BC when Alexander the Great defeated the Persians, and if the symbolic increment of time is intended to mean years, all we have to do to test this is to do some addition and see if the results are biblically significant. So add 1967 to 333 (1967 + 333 = 1967), and the result is the year the Jews regained the Holy Mount. Something was made right at the holy place, but not completely. The book I offer has this and numerous other observations with more background and detail to make the case. The book ends with a look at the Jewish marriage customs as they relate to the words of Jesus and the resurrected body, which is the “Your Part in It” aspect the books title refers to.

Amazon won’t allow me to make the book free with the exception of a few days every 90 days, but I set the price at the lowest possible. I extend my thanks to those who purchased the book as that paid Amazon for their services. Graphics from the book don’t show up well on small screens so have been posted here http://bp-ga.blogspot.com/

Remember the words of Paul 2Ti 4:8 “Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day--and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.”

 


************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; ) Acts 17:11
************