UCG - The Law is Our Key to Life

Hello valued and astute reader! xHWA here.

Usually Martha would be writing today's post, but since she's a woman and apparently completely unqualified to write about anything but Christian living pieces, we have a guest post instead.

By, umm... Martin.

^^^^^^^^Definitely not a woman. :-)

If you're angry at me for that insensitive and misogynistic statement above, please let me explain.

Robert Dick, head of the UCG Council, presented a highly pro-Herbert Armstrong sermon at a recent Council meeting. Afterwards, a discussion ensued among the Council. At one point in the discussion, several of the Council members discussed what role women should have in writing articles for UCG publications. Seems the ladies aren't writing in sufficiently legal forms, preferring dangerously "Christian living" tones in their articles. In a boldly mediocre move, the Council decided not to decide anything for now.

We at ABD think this to be a very Worldwide Church of God tone from a group that is reputed to be distancing themselves from Herbert Armstrong. And Martin has a few things to say about that.

So, Martin, take it away!

I have really good news for the Armstrong loyalists in the United Church of God and really bad news for the progressives. Or maybe it's the other way around. I'm really not sure.

UCG recently held its annual General Conference of Elders, which featured the theme “Live the Word.” During the conference, Council Chairman Robert Dick gave a sermon by the same title that focused on learning and living sound doctrine. Now, according to UCG, if I were a woman, I would be totally unqualified to analyze this sermon. Especially in writing. It's a good thing that my chromosomes are in alphabetical order; and thus I can safely tell you that the rumors that UCG is jettisoning the teachings of Herbert W Armstrong are unfounded. Either that, or UCG leaders are trying to pull off one of the greatest bait-and-switch schemes in history.

Now, some of you who heard the sermon are probably thinking, what are you talking about, Martin? Mr. Dick didn't even mention Herbert Armstrong by name in his sermon.

You're right, I'm pretty sure he didn't. He was either too wise to do so, or someone advised him not to do it. But there is no question whose doctrines he endorsed. Throughout the first third of the sermon, Mr. Dick repeatedly commended the conviction and efforts of those who died “in the faith,” as well as living members of this “pioneer” generation.

Now let me think a minute. Just whose teachings did those guys follow?

So anyway, Mr. Dick lauded these pioneers who “lived the word” for badges of honor like losing jobs over the Feast of Tabernacles and being punished by local draft boards. These people, he says, were living for the future. One day the world will recognize the example they set.

“There is a comment made by Peter that I think all of us in this room are familiar with, where Peter talks about living this way and being spoken evil of because you live this way,” Mr. Dick said. “But, and the inference is, when the kingdom comes, and God converts them, they will glorify God for the example they saw.”

When giving a sermon on sound doctrine, one might be better off actually reading scripture rather than citing inferences. But then again, doing so would detract from Mr. Dick's point. Let's look at 1 Peter 2:11-12, which is the verse to which he alludes:

“Beloved, I beg you as sojourners and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul, having your conduct honorable among the Gentiles, that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by your good works which they observe, glorify God in the day of visitation.”

Is Peter talking about “good works” like observing the Feast of Tabernacles? No! He is exhorting Christians to abstain from “fleshly lusts.” Works of the flesh like adultery, theft, lying and murder. Peter is exhorting Christians to live morally upright lives, not to observe the Holy Days.

Next, Mr. Dick reminds us that it's not just older generations that have made tough choices. Plenty of young people have chosen to “live the word,” in ancient and modern times. For example, remember Daniel? He stood up by refusing to eat the king's food. He refused to compromise.

Point taken, but really? That's the first example you give? Mr. Dick follows up with Joseph, who refused to sin with Potiphar's wife, and Daniel's friends who chose the furnace over bowing to a false god. In a message about living the Christian life, why not mention those guys first? This is a prepared message, not an off-the-cuff conversation. It's broadcast to congregations around the world. If the choice to mention unclean foods ahead of fornication wasn't deliberate, it's certainly could indicate misplaced spiritual priorities.

Still not fully convinced that UCG still endorses HWA's doctrines? Well, its council chairman then directly states that “21 years ago we saw the effect of abandoning sound doctrine.”

“Stop and think about it,” he said. “We (UCG) came into existence at a time where preserving sound doctrine was paramount.”

Now, what happened 21 years ago? Oh right. That was 1995, when the Worldwide Church of God abandoned HWA's teachings and UCG broke off to preserve them. And now those in Mr. Dick's generation have the responsibility to teach them to the next generation, like Paul did with Timothy.

But it's not enough just to know doctrine, Mr. Dick then tells us.

“But as the dust settles and as the air clears, and as you look around, you come to realize that you have to have sound doctrine, but if that's all you have, you are still bankrupt.”

SPOILER ALERT: This is not going where you think it is. It certainly didn't go where I expected, because I mentally jumped to 1 Corinthians 13:2, which tells us:

And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. (ESV).

Instead Mr. Dick told us UCG's “spiritual house is built upon two pillars: having the word, then living the word.”

Wait. I thought. Jesus was the foundation. The Bible tells us He is the chief cornerstone, He is the Rock upon whom we should build our lives.

Nope. Mr. Dick insists that, when Paul stressed sound doctrine to Timothy, he was speaking about the law. Listening to him, one would think that the pastoral epistles can be summed up by 1 Timothy 1:8-11, which begins:

But we know the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate...

According to him, “the law” is the foundation for a righteous life.

"What's the law? It's a guidebook, an instruction book, a how-to. It's life for dummies," he said. "So we all had to read it. And that's what it taught us.”

Let me be clear. Sound doctrine is important. Consistent systematic theology based on biblical exegesis in context - which the COGs do not have - is vital. It is vital because it is the basis for our faith. Without faith, we can neither receive the gift of salvation nor understand our Christian responsibilities. Evangelical teacher John MacArthur explains how Paul masterfully achieves this goal in the book of Romans - establishing an 11-chapter doctrinal foundation before transitioning to practical application in chapter 12.

"Resting on eleven chapters of profound doctrine, Paul calls each believer to a supreme act of spiritual worship — giving oneself as a living sacrifice," MacArthur explains. "Doctrine gives rise to dedication to Christ, the greatest practical act. And the remainder of the book of Romans goes on to explain the many practical outworkings of one's dedication to Christ.

But "the law" is not the same thing as "sound doctrine."  Mr. Dick incorrectly interchanges the concept of sound Christian doctrine with "the law" throughout his message. Though he's hazy in his terminology, this becomes abundantly clear when he links 1 Timothy 1:8-11 and 2 Timothy 4:2-4 in the context of 1995.

When New Testament writers refer to “the law,” they are speaking of the Sinai Covenant, which was delivered to the Hebrew people. The law is not the oral tradition of the Jews, a claim which some in the COGs make to try to twist Paul's statements on law. The law is not the 10 Commandments. The law is not the cherry-picked handbook of regulations that the COGs endorse. The law is the entirety of the Sinai Covenant, all 613-ish laws that God gave to the Israelites at Mount Sinai.

UCG and the other COGs get in over their heads when they endorse their cherry-picked method of "law-keeping" as a factor in salvation. The book of James makes it clear that the law is a package deal. If we break one, we break them all. How many of those 613-ish laws do we need to keep, how consistently do we need to do it, and for how long in order to qualify for salvation? And let's not forget about the commands of Jesus and his Apostles. Although, at least as far as this sermon goes, UCG has.

I've never found an Armstrongist minister who can tell me what my spiritual batting average must be at death to escape the Lake of Fire. Mr. Dick, who interchangeably equates the law and the Armstrongist way of life in his sermon, doesn't tell us exactly which 10, 25 or 613 we must master, but at least he gives us a time frame.

“It is sobering in reading that hymn to say that a man who has been righteousness, and in the end abandons that righteousness, all of his righteousness will be forgotten,” he said. “Ninety percent's not good enough. Simply isn't going to cut it.”

Ironically, the doctrines that Paul stressed in his writings – the doctrines he pleaded with Timothy to hold fast – taught the opposite. A pharisee who strived to keep the law rigorously, Paul came to see that he could neither dig himself out of sin debt nor keep himself out once his “debt” was paid off at conversion. Paul recognized that obedience could never change his flawed heart (Romans 7:24). Only the Holy Spirit could do that. He spent the rest of his life after conversion spreading that message – that salvation comes to Christians by grace through faith in Jesus. As an ethnic Jew, Paul continued in some of his Hebrew practices. But he did not try to force them on Gentiles. In fact, most New Testament books mention the early church's struggle to keep Jewish Christians from placing a burden on Gentiles that the Jews themselves could not carry.

Paul stressed salvation by grace through faith in Jesus (Ephesians 2:8-9), not a spiritual scorecard. He stressed that all men fall short (Romans 3:23), that no condemnation remains for those who have accepted Christ's sacrifice (Romans 8:1), that  it is God who sees us through to the end (Philippians 1:6) and that nothing can separate us from His love (Romans 8:38-39). The Christian's moral life; his obedience to the commands of Jesus (and His apostles) are an act of worship and thanksgiving for bearing our sin. These “works” are intended to glorify God and draw others to Christ.

Go through the books of first and second Timothy as Mr. Dick suggests. You will not find Paul instructing Timothy about Holy Days or clean and unclean meats. Actually, you will find one reference to meat, and it does not support UCG's “sound doctrine.” You will find Christian living guidelines, qualifications for leaders and directions for correcting church members. You will find warnings of coming apostasy. You will find exhortations to pursue faith, love, patience and gentleness. Discussion of “law” are limited to its usefulness in showing man his sinfulness and futility in reconciling himself to God. And admonition of teachers unnecessarily clinging to the law and causing division. Hmmm, the COGs wouldn't know anything about that, would they?

The law was intended to teach sinners, for sure. But the lesson was not that sinners needed to keep all 613-ish laws consistently in order to live a righteous life. The lesson was that sinners could not keep all 613-ish laws at any point in time. That they could neither make themselves right with God, nor maintain their right standing after repentance. The law was intended to lead sinners to Christ – to show them that their only hope for salvation, for right standing before God, was to stop placing their faith in themselves and instead place their faith in Jesus.

(Galatians 3:19-25) What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator does not mediate for one only, but God is one. Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we ere kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Once we humble ourselves at the foot of the cross, we no longer need a tutor. We are guided by the Spirit of God living in us. We strive to follow the teachings of Jesus and His apostles. We strive to live moral, upright lives that bring honor and glory to God and turn others to Jesus. But when we fall short, as we undoubtedly will, we can have peace because our hope depends upon God's goodness, not ours.

Unless you are in UCG. In that case, your hope depends upon living sound doctrine, according to Mr. Dick.

“Sound doctrine, the basis for the formation of this body, and then living that sound doctrine, are our keys to life,” he said.

There you have it. There's no “new direction” for UCG, at least not if this message is representative of UCG's position. There's only the sanitized, modernized, shined-up doctrines of Herbert Armstrong. Law and behavior, not faith in Jesus Christ, are the way, the foundation and the keys to life in UCG.

It's so clear, I suspect even a woman could see it.

Well well well. There you have it indeed!

Yet again, we see that it's not just the Ten Commandments, or the holy days, or tithing, or meats, or even just "Spiritual Israel," but a wholesale desire to return to the Old Covenant - with women as silent, invisible, second class citizens and all. Is that really the tone the UCG wants to set? Is that really the same UCG that we've been told is changing the errors of the past? The law is their life. But even so, even in all of this, they still don't want to keep but a fraction of their own cherry-picked selections from the law. So, time after time after time we hear "The law! The law! Just not that law."

Thank you again, Martin, for taking the time to write this insightful piece and thus saving us all from the embarrassment of having a woman critique the UCG's stance on the law.

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

The Letter Kills: PCG Claims Another Life

Here at As Bereans Did, we are frequently asked the question: what's wrong with keeping the law? What's the danger in teaching your children that they must keep the Sabbath and Holy Days? Weren't these things given to man for good? What's the big deal?

We see a very basic warning on this matter in Titus 3:9:

“But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless.”

Why would debates about the law and genealogies be useless? Isn't this what God wants us to follow; what He expects from us? The Churches of God largely differentiate themselves from “deceived” Christianity by two of these things listed in Titus 3 - that Christians should “keep” the law, and that modern Israel populates the United States and Western Europe. What's the harm in this?

Unfortunately, we recently learned about a heart-breaking situation that demonstrates why strivings over the law can be so destructive. We take no joy in reporting this situation. Rather, we hope that bringing to light issues and consequences like these can  help prevent future tragedies in the Armstrongist community.

Once upon a time, a kind, loving couple who desired to serve God raised their children diligently in the Worldwide Church of God. In 1995, they left for one of the larger, more moderate splinter groups, and the whole family stayed there for years. Their children grew up. One child stayed in the same group as the parents.  Another decided that the lukewarm splinter they attended was not zealous enough for God's law. He and his wife took their young children with them to the Philadelphia Church of God and cut off all contact with their COG family.

Fast forward several years. It is reported that, in their desire to obey their church leaders, the younger PCG couple kicked one of their children out of the house because he had a girlfriend and wasn't spending enough time reading his Bible. Disfellowshipped from PCG, that child moved in with his COG grandparents, whom he hadn't seen in years. He took his own life during the Days of Unleavened Bread, at the age of 21. Not surprisingly, PCG is telling its membership that the young man was mentally ill. Later reports included details that muddy the picture of whether mental illness or PCG's no-contact policy is to blame for his suicide. Some who knew him say they doubt PCG's story. At the very least, the no-contact policy no doubt exacerbated the pain for someone with few emotional and spiritual supports.

Since the young man was cut off from most friends and family, we'll never get a 100 percent accurate picture of what happened. But we've seen enough similarly tragic stories in COG groups to connect the dots fairly well. In 2014, 30-year-old Janet Privratsky committed suicide after PCG's no-contact policy cut her off from her family. Last year, 27-year-old David Ekama – a member of the United Church of God – took his own life. We have personal knowledge of another UCG teen who ran away and left his parents a suicide note after being pressured by tent-mates at UCG summer camp around the time of the UCG-COGWA split. What were they pressuring him to do? Leave UCG for a more conservative splinter that kept the law and Sabbath closer to the way WCG founder Herbert W Armstrong taught. Thankfully, his story had a happier ending. But the pattern is clear.

What's the danger in teaching that keeping the law, or aspects of it, is a condition for salvation? Well, when you teach your children that they are responsible for maintaining their right standing with God, they will believe you. Don't tell me your church doesn't teach this. I've documented that UCG does, and if the supposedly lukewarm UCG does it, the rest do, too. And when they hear from the pulpit, week after week, that being in the wrong church means they are not a true Christian, chances are good that they will believe that, too.

So anyway, some kids are fine with pat answers to questions about moderate COGs' cherry-picked way of keeping the law. Some are satisfied with a simple: “because the minister says it's ok.”  But others will see through the cognitive dissonance and wonder:

• Why is it wrong for Dad to work on the Sabbath but not wrong to pay a waitress to work for me on Saturday? 
• If keeping the Holy Days matters, then don't we have to keep them on the right day? Don't we determine Holy Days the way God told us in the Bible – according to the visual confirmation of the New Moon? 
• If pig meat is unclean, then why is it all right roast marshmallows made from pig bones at the church campout? 

Let me make one thing clear: I don't blame anyone in this family for the disastrous turn of events. The grandparents, the parents, anyone. All of them walked the same road that many of us have traveled. All of them wanted to obey their Creator. All of them were doing their best to please God. None of us can fully predict the consequences of our actions, the reactions of others or know what's in the minds and hearts of those around us. These people are simply the latest victims of the treacherous leadership of the Philadelphia Church of God; and ultimately of Herbert W Armstrong, the late founder of the Church of God movement. Perhaps this is why the Bible tells us to test prophets – so that if they are found to be false, we should not heed what they tell us. Sadly, ignoring this instruction can have a ripple effect on one's children and grandchildren. Perhaps this is how a father's actions affect the third and fourth generations.

Many COG youth are becoming more lax about defining God's true church, but this isn't taught from the pulpit. Most COGs still hint, if not state, that you must attend God's favored splinter group to make it into the Kingdom. Chances are good your kids have absorbed this harmful teaching, whether or not you reinforce it at home. And if you have, don't be surprised when they eventually choose another splinter and turn from you. After all, didn't Jesus come to set son against father, mother against daughter, and mother-in-law against daughter in law? Whoever gives up family for His sake will be rewarded in the Kingdom. (Please read here to learn more about PCG's twisted interpretation of these scriptures.)

This destructive “One True Church” teaching is especially dangerous in the most oppressive cults like PCG, which tend to reject members when they are no longer able to control them. This is when our children find themselves in the true depths of despair. We've taught them that their salvation is dependent upon their record of obedience. We've taught them their salvation depends upon being in the right church. Many have cut themselves off from family and friends outside the cult to be obedient to their ministers. Now, this church chews them up, spits them out and tells them they can't come back. Cut off, they are now unable to obey what they believe they must do in order to “make it.”

Life is volatile enough for teens and young adults. Let's not force them into corners from which they see no escape. Let's not isolate them so that are easy pickings for the prowling devil. I'm not saying all COG children are at risk for suicide, or that mainstream Christian families never experience this kind of tragedy. But let's not set children up for failure. We don't know whether disfellowshipment, the no-contact policy or mental illness was the straw that broke the camel's back for this young man. But fellowship and support in a healthy church or regular contact with friends and family could have short-circuited whatever caused his feedback loop of darkness and might have prevented this tragedy.

When we teach our children that salvation is dependent upon their works, especially works from the Sinai Covenant, we shouldn't be surprised when they see the problem with watered-down keeping of the law. We shouldn't be surprised when they go to greater lengths than we ever expected, and that their decisions affect future generations. If we teach them that these are matters of sin and righteousness, of salvation, then many may see “because the Church says so” as an irresponsible answer with eternal consequences. Those kids are smart. And they are right.

If “not one jot or tittle” means what the COGs teach it means, then it really means not ONE jot or tittle. There is no sliding scale for righteousness; no bell curve; no, “at least I keep the Sabbath unlike these deceived Protestants.” Either EVERY jot and tittle matters for salvation, or salvation is by grace through faith. Either we maintain our salvation through our track record of obedience, repentance and change, or there is a different standard.  If our grace is maintained through our human works, then we are as good as dead now. This is a burden man simply can't bear. Over the years, a number of COG youth have recognized this fact and, tragically, turned the theoretical into a reality.

Thankfully, Scripture tells us that at least some of those “jots and tittles” have changed. Which ones? Well for starters, the laws regarding both circumcision and the tribal requirement for priesthood. Those have changed, indisputably. indisputable. So it stands to reason that others may have, too. And Scripture also tells us we are not as good as dead, but that we have already passed from death to life (1 John 3:14).

If you have serious doubts about your Church of God group but are putting off dealing with them, don't. I know, it's inconvenient, it's awkward, and it can get messy. Besides, you might say, I know the difference between the truth and error coming from the pulpit. Do you? And does the rest of your family there, beside you? You've taught them to listen to the minister, to respect him. What happens when he chooses the radical opinion of a minister instead of yours? Just because you and the rest of your family are in a sane, moderate group right now doesn't mean that they always will be. If God has been telling you to get out, and you've been hanging out on the fence, be obedient. Get out!

And despite what your minister as told you, “getting out” doesn't mean leaving God. Teach your children about God. It's the most important thing you can do. Teach them Scripture. Teach them to take God's word seriously. Teach them to obey His commands – not the ones Jesus gave to Israel in the Sinai Covenant, but the ones He and His apostles gave to participants in the New Covenant. Teach them about grace. Teach them about God's love. Teach them that Jesus died for them; teach them to live for Him. Teach them about their responsibility to obey, to live as bondservants of the one who purchased them with His blood. Teach them to listen for God's prompting, to cooperate with Him, to let Him work with and through them. Teach them to live a life that brings honor and glory to His name. But also teach them the parable of the prodigal son – of a God whose arms are always open to us. And then follow that parable yourself.

What's the danger in teaching obedience to the law as a condition for salvation? This is the danger. Our hearts, our sympathies and our prayers go out to the friends and family of this young man. There are more people praying for you than you will ever know, and we are here to listen if you need us.

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

Spiritual Traps from the Days of Unleavened Bread, Part 3

In my previous two posts, we've talked about some reasons that keeping the Days Unleavened Bread can be spiritually dangerous. In part 1,we discussed the veil of spiritual blindness that comes from focusing on the Sinai Covenant. In part 2, we warned about the self-righteousness that keeping the Days of Unleavened Bread can foster. Today, we'll consider the confused allegiance that comes from mixing the wine and wineskins from different covenants.

Retaining extraneous practices from the Sinai Covenant can divide our hearts and our spiritual focus. Consider these confusing statements from UCG's Gary Antion, published March-April 2016 edition of the United News:

“God commands us to remove all leavening from our homes for the Days of Unleavened Bread (Exodus 12:15-20). How diligently we do so is an indication of how badly we want to put sin out of our lives,” writes Gary Antion in the United Church of God's March-April United News.

Then, just paragraphs later, he writes:

“Use intelligence. You can go overboard in cleaning and be exhausted when Passover comes.”

Before you conclude this is the product of UCG's alleged watered-down doctrines, consider that this article first appeared in the Worldwide Church of God's Worldwide News in March 1986.

Contradictory statements like Antion's demonstrate why Jesus warned against putting new wine in old wineskins. If diligence in unleavening indicates our attitude toward rooting out sin, then we should give this task 110 percent. If having leaven in our homes this week is a sin; and sin separates us from God and jeopardizes our salvation, then nothing is too radical! It is better to inherit the kingdom with one eye than to enter the Lake of Fire with both (Matthew 18:9).

But if it's possible to “go overboard” in our deleavening, then we must admit that having crumbs lodged deep in the toaster at the end of this week isn't sin. And if it isn't, then does God truly expect us to do the rest of it? If not, wouldn't it make more sense to forego extensive physical preparations and instead focus solely on spiritual preparation?

The Churches of God fall into this trap regularly. Which should be our priority, preparation for the Sabbath or doing good where we have opportunity? In this fast-paced age, the two are often mutually exclusive. Should the average working COG member spend weeknights preparing his or her home and meals for the Sabbath or have other, more New Testament-focused priorities? That's not to mention the Sabbath itself. That's another topic for another day.

Or what about clean and unclean foods? These days, understanding the terms on food labels practically requires a degree in food science to decode. Does God expect us to spend our lives learning technical names to decode food wrappers? Is every unexamined cup of yogurt, marshmallow and Dorito a strike against us?

These examples may sound silly, but they're the logical conclusion of a religious system that teaches obedience to tenets of the Sinai Covenant factor into our salvation under the New Covenant. They also help feed the mistaken COG belief that we maintain our justification before God through our work, and that each mis-step puts our salvation in jeopardy.

The symbolism of the Days of Unleavened Bread sounds good on the surface. Of course they do! They were shadows pointing to Jesus and what He would do for humanity. But that is what they were – shadows revealing our need. Now that the Son has risen, we need to leave the shadows behind and walk in His light.

When you look deeper, the Days of Unleavened Bread reveal the holes in the COG teachings on salvation – that our works maintain our right standing before God. The symbolism sounds good on a surface level. Now that the Son has risen, we need to step into His light and leave the shadows behind.

I believe it's no accident that Jesus rose during the Days of Unleavened Bread. It's a beautiful picture of what He did for us. In the midst of our losing battle to make ourselves acceptable to God, Jesus came and sacrificed Himself for us. His resurrection interrupted that endless cycle. And yet some are determined to continue in it.

A house divided against itself cannot stand. We cannot serve two masters. When we try to fulfill the requirements of two covenants, we will fulfill neither fully. We must choose one and dedicate our lives to it fully. The law cannot save. Only a Savior can.

So how did you spend this week? What messages have you heard at church? Did most look back to Sinai, back Israel, or focus on the New Covenant in His blood? Did you celebrate a lavish, fabricated observance on the night that your Savior's scattered disciples mourned? Did you ignore the fact that Jesus rose because doing so is too Protestant?

Take heart. The shed blood of your risen Savior can cover these sins and many more. The fact that He rose proves that what He and His apostles said - that you are now truly unleavened.

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

Spiritual Traps from the Days of Unleavened Bread - Part 2

Today I'd like to continue my series about the spiritually dangers of the Days of Unleavened Bread. Last time, we examined Paul's writings in 2 Corinthians 3 discussing the veil that kept the Jews from comprehending their Savior, and how it applies to the Churches of God. This time, we'll look at another spiritual trap the Days of Unleavened Bread encourage – fostering dependence on works and self-righteousness.

There's no denying that the Sinai Covenant was works-heavy. Eat this. Don't eat that. Rest on a certain day. Make your clothes in this certain way. Obey these things and you will be God's special people. He will bless your nation, water your crops, multiply your herds and scatter your enemies.

As a result, the Hebrews became pretty pleased with themselves. They took pride in their special status with God. Consider the Pharisees' statement to Jesus in Matthew 3:9 - “We have Abraham as OUR Father.” Throughout the gospels, we get a good picture of how the Jews viewed the gentiles. They regarded them as dogs.

Gentiles, of course, could join the nation and become party to the Sinai Covenant. If a foreigner wanted to join the nation, all the males in his family must be circumcised before he could take the Passover (Exodus 12:48). And if one did not keep the Passover, he was cut off from Israel and remained in his sins (Numbers 9:13).

This is why circumcision was such a big deal in the early church. Many Jewish Christians believed their Gentile brethren needed to become circumcised to enter the community of faith. But make no mistake – this was not just about circumcision. Circumcision was the rite, the gateway that made outsiders eligible to be party to the Sinai Covenant and “keep the law.”

It's obvious that many Jews still felt superior to the Gentiles. We are more than a quarter of the way through the book of Acts before we see that Gentiles can receive the Holy Spirit – and even the apostles are astonished! Even after the matter is settled in Acts 15, many Jews still tried to pressure Gentiles to become circumcised. Even Peter was not immune to this prejudice and hypocrisy, as we see in Galatians 2.

There's no doubt that self-righteousness like this exists in the COGs today. It's probably partially due to confusion caused by Herbert Armstrong's disproven theory of British Israelism. But even COG publications give evidence of this self-righteousness; mostly over points of Sinai Covenant law keeping. How many times have you seen statements like these in print over the years: “True Christians keep the Sabbath.” “True Christians faithfully observe God's Holy Days.” These statements are coupled with language disparaging sincere Christians as “so-called” and “deceived” in publications like the Living Church of God's “Tomorrow's World” magazine. Forget what Jesus said would be the true sign of His disciples.

“I see all that too, Martha, and it disgusts me,” you might say. “But that's not me. I keep certain laws because I can see that they have benefits, not because I think they qualify me for salvation.”

Look, I totally understand the desire to continue with habitual, often lifelong, physical practices, especially if you think you see blessings. But the fact is, we were heavily propagandized about many of these practices, and that thinking doesn't go away overnight.

But the Sabbath is a great blessing, you might say. I don't disagree, in theory. Physical rest certainly has benefits, as does assembling with those of like mind. Assembling for worship, prayer and support is commanded in the New Testament as well. But these practices would benefit us ANY day of the week, not just on Saturday.

Perhaps tithing is your hang up. God loves a cheerful giver! But if 10 percent is good, wouldn't 15 percent be better? I mean, if we are to be “living sacrifices,” well, Jesus didn't just lose a couple of limbs. He gave it all.

Or maybe clean and unclean meats is your thing. God made all animals, and knows which ones are good and bad to eat. Certainly following food laws has physical benefit! Peter avoided unclean meats for years after the crucifixion! Many believe that pork carries health risks. Many more believe eating red meat, such as beef, is even more risky. If you're really concerned about taking a stand for health, you probably should cut out all meat, not just pork. Paul said he would never eat meat again if it was causing a brother to stumble. Maybe we should all listen to Paul, PETA and Dr. Mercola.

The fact is, blessings for physical observances that were stated in the Sinai Covenant vanished with the Sinai Covenant. Scripture plainly says that covenant is obsolete. True, things like adultery and murder are still wrong under the New Covenant. But it's because they violate the teachings of Jesus, not because they violate the 10 Commandments. They, along with the rest of the Sinai Covenant, were  intended to show people their sinfulness and need for a Savior. Once we come to that understanding, it has done its job, and we no longer need a tutor. The indwelling Holy Spirit becomes our guide. God uses this method to shows us our sins and flaws on a far deeper level than any checklist ever could.

This same God who knows our hearts so deeply understood that linking salvation to our works would lead either to self-righteousness or despair. It would cause us to either see ourselves as better than others or as a desolate sinner with no hope. God knew what He was doing when he established grace, not works, as the basis for salvation.

The Days of Unleavened Bread reinforce the very things salvation by grace was intended to short-circuit. We focus obsessively on a physical task, on our actions. We attempt an admittedly impossible task – removing all leavening from our dwellings - as symbolic of an even more impossible spiritual task. We pause to remember the death of our Savior; then deny the reality He came to establish – that we are truly unleavened now, thanks to Him (1 Corinthians 5:7).

Avoiding sin is good. Taking in the Bread of Life is good. But we can do these things without flirting with a yoke of bondage; without celebrating a Holy Day that focuses on the physical and establishes a performance trap mentality.  Which leads to the third concern about the Days of Unleavened Bread, which I'll discuss in my final DUB post.

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

World Vision Honors LCG Contract; Will Host Seminar

World Vision Canada will honor its existing contract with the Living Church of God and host its "Tomorrow's World" seminar as scheduled on June 4.

Earlier this week, As Bereans Did learned that World Vision Canada had rescheduled LCG's seminar. Originally, LCG planned to host its "Tomorrow's World" seminar on May 14.  But that date was cancelled after concerned ex-Armstrongists contacted the humanitarian organization with concerns that the cult may have misled World Vision about its history and ties to Herbert Armstrong's doctrines.

 At that time, World Vision said they planned to review their rental policies to make sure they weren't allowing groups that went against the ministry's mission and values. They confirmed today that the review was in process; but that it was in its early stages and would take time to complete.

"Until a resolution on our policy is reached, any Licensee agreements that we already have in place will be honoured as per the terms of their current contractual agreement," World Vision Canada told ABD today.

We wish that World Vision had stuck to its guns when it first cancelled the cult's seminar due to a "planned building cleaning" on May 14. But we understand that a contract is a contract, and that LCG's laywers are already working overtime thanks to the Scarborough lawsuit against the cult. What's a breech-of-contract filing when you're already dealing with a mess like that?

This isn't the first time LCG has hidden in the skirts of evangelical World Vision to lure in unsuspecting prospects. But we hope it will be the last.

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

Spiritual Traps from the Days of Unleavened Bread - Part 1

It's just about time for Passover, so I assume your Wonder Bread and Saltines are long gone. Mine are, too.
But only because I don't buy them in the first place. They're gross. But the yeast in my refrigerator is alive and well.

I kept the Days of Unleavened Bread for most of my life. I even started festival traditions with my own family.  Even now, I wish I could look back on these memories with warm, fuzzy feelings. But I don't. In hindsight, I find the festival troubling.

Why? Isn't this celebration acceptable, possibly commanded for Christians? Isn't it part of the law? An astute reader asked us last week -  is it wrong to keep portions of the law – as long as we understand that it is not REQUIRED salvation? Especially if we see doing so keeps physical and spiritual blessings?

The short answer, of course, is no. Scripture tells us that Peter continued to follow Sinai's dietary laws for years after Christ's sacrifice. We have evidence that Paul marked Pentecost and occasionally spent the feast day in Jerusalem several years after his conversion. It would be foolish to argue that continuing these practices disqualified these great apostles for salvation.

Furthermore, we know many gentiles in the early church kept the Holy Days along with their Jewish brethren. Consider the brethren at Corinth, who met in the home of the local synagogue leader. A deeper look at scripture reveals Paul referenced the festival they had recently celebrated, but wasn't commanding them to literally keep a feast. Regardless, we can see the brethren were familiar with the concept of leavening.

It was only when the balance of the early church shifted primarily to a gentile population that these festivals – which the apostles determined were not binding upon gentiles – were discarded. Really, the argument the COGs make today regarding the Holy Days is nothing new – it's a debate that started in Acts 15. Nothing is new under the sun. But at any rate, no one would argue that these early Christians – many of whom were persecuted and martyred – disqualified themselves for salvation by keeping the Holy Days.

So what's the big deal? Why do the Days of Unleavened Bread bother me so much? I know, it's because I'm bitter. Or because I let someone else take my crown. Or maybe I'm just really lazy and don't want to clean the house (please don't raise that issue with my husband!). Some of  might be your minister's answer. But I disagree. Strongly.

I truly believe keeping the Holy Days can be spiritually detrimental. And none seem more potentially toxic to me than the Days of Unleavened Bread. While the DUB are not inherently wrong, they are backward-looking and can distract us from many spiritual realities that Christ came to establish. They can help feed the very pride and self-righteousness the COGs teach should be expelled at this time of year. Finally, they split our focus between two very different covenants and sets of promises. I'd like to discuss these problems in my next several posts.

DISTRACTION

Paul explains my first reason upon my first reason in 2 Corinthians 3. While Paul refers specifically to his Jewish brothers, I believe this danger applies to anyone who clings to practices from the Sinai Covenant.

(2 Corinthians 3:13-15, NIV) We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts.”

Remember back in Exodus, when Moses' face was illuminated after he came down the mountain with the tablets of the Sinai Covenant? It was so dramatic that he wore a veil so he wouldn't frighten the Israelites. But rather than being sobered by the significance of what Moses' shining face indicated, Paul says, the veil became a barrier that prevented Israel from seeing God's glory. It distracted them, much like their devotion to the law distracted them from seeing Jesus for who He was and what He did.

Expositor's Bible Commentary explains it this way:

“Although the OT does not explicitly state that the radiance on the face of Moses gradually faded and then disappeared, Paul deduced that the reason for Moses's veiling or masking his face was not so much to prevent the Israelites from being dazzled by its brightness as to prevent them from continuing to gaze in amazement till his face had totally lost the brilliance of the reflected glory. He was attempting to teach them, Paul implies, that the newly established order was destined to be eclipsed and pass away.” 

Moses veiled his face, Paul claims, so the Israelites wouldn't focus on him until the shine was totally faded. But figuratively speaking, they kept staring at the veil even once the glow was gone.

Let me give a more concrete example. Are you familiar with the glow sticks the dollar store sells around July 4th and Halloween? You know, the ones full of neon chemicals so toxic they would probably burn a hole in your finger if they leaked? My children are obsessed with them. These sticks light up for 24 hours, tops, and yet my children will hold onto them for a week, insisting they still see a faint glow. Trying to take them away reminds me of Gollum and the Ring.

With all due respect, the Jews are like my kids and their glow sticks. They are holding onto the Sinai Covenant, convinced that some light remains. They were unable to see that the Sinai Covenant, the “ministry of death, written and engraved in stones” (2 Corinthians 3:7) has passed away (2 Corinthians 3:8), was “becoming obsolete and growing old” and was ready to vanish (Hebrews 8:13). Their desperation to focus on the glory of the Sinai Covenant and retain their passing status as God's special people rendered them unable to see the true Light of the World.

“Paul could call it the "same" veil, because in both cases a veil prevented vision, whether physical or spiritual, or because it was identical to the veil of ignorance about the transitory nature of the Mosaic economy covering the hearts of the contemporaries of Moses. “ (The Expositor's Bible Commentary). 

In a similar way, when the COGs cling to select tenets of the Sinai Covenant, it keeps them looking backwards. It keeps their focus on the passing glory of Sinai rather than on the Light of the World, what He taught and what He accomplished.

Don't believe me? Consider this pre-Passover “self-examination” questionnaire COGWA made available to its members this week. The very first question focuses on the 10 commandments; question two analyzes Sabbath observance and question three concerns the Holy Days. We see their first  mention of Christ and following his teachings in question five – almost a third of the way through the questionnaire. But I thought Passover was all Jesus and his sacrifice, mercy and humbling ourselves? If so, why do He and His teachings get such a mediocre ranking?

When we look back to Sinai for the basis of our actions, we can't help but get mired in works. Which brings us to the next problem with the law and the Days of Unleavened Bread – the issue of the self-righteousness. We'll explore this problem later in the festival.

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