Tuesday, November 10, 2026

Did Christianity Absorb Paganism?




The Jehovah's Witnesses and the Armstrong Churches of God have promoted the notion that traditional Christianity has absorbed many of the practices and traditions of paganism. In this service, they have employed many of the long-discredited and anti-Catholic narratives of the Protestant Reformation. The real narrative, however, is that Christianity triumphed over paganism, and very nearly obliterated all traces of the religions of the Western World! Indeed, as we will demonstrate in this post, the Christians of the first four centuries of the Church were inexorably opposed to the pagan religions of the Roman Empire.

In his The Triumph of Christianity (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2018), Professor Bart Ehrman's analyzes the causes/reasons for the growth of Christianity and its eventual victory over other faiths of the Western World. He wrote: One thing lost in this triumph was all the massive and glorious diversity of religious expression found everywhere throughout the pagan world. We can never lose sight of just how varied the thousands of pagan cults were. They did share common features--sacrifice and prayer, for example. But they involved the worship of different gods, known from different myths, adored through different practices, cults devoted to Zeus, to Athena, to Apollo, to Haphaestus, to gods of forests and streams and meadows, to gods of the household and gods of the family. As a rule this enormous diversity brought with it a widespread tolerance of difference, a sense that varying paths to the divine were not only acceptable and allowed but also desirable. Tolerance was to be encouraged. Freedom of religion was to be embraced. One of the greatest aspects of ancient paganism, taken as a whole, was the widespread willingness to accommodate an even revel in diversity. That was lost with the triumph of Christianity.

We will now survey the writings of some of those "early Church Fathers" of the first four centuries of the Christian era to demonstrate just how negative their reaction to the paganism of the Roman Empire actually was. In looking through these writings, it will become very clear that these leaders of the Christian Church were unalterably opposed to paganisms in all of its many forms and practices. This, alone, should be enough to discredit the narrative of the Jehovah's Witnesses and Armstrongists about the infiltration of paganism into traditional Christianity. Even so, this blog and others (like As Bereans Did and Banned by HWA) have published numerous well-researched posts dealing with specific holidays and religious traditions which also disprove this false narrative. Nevertheless, let's take a look at what those Church Fathers had to say on the subject of paganism.

Justin Martyr (100-165)
For of philosophy, too, some assume the name and the garb who do nothing worthy of their profession; and you are well aware, that those of the ancients whose opinions and teachings were quite diverse, are yet all called by the one name of philosophers. And of these some taught atheism; and the poets who have flourished among you raise a laugh out of the uncleanness of Jupiter with his own children. And those who now adopt such instruction are not restrained by you; but, on the contrary, you bestow prizes and honours upon those who euphoniously insult the gods.

Why, then, should this be? In our case, who pledge ourselves to do no wickedness, nor to hold these atheistic opinions, you do not examine the charges made against us; but, yielding to unreasoning passion, and to the instigation of evil demons, you punish us without consideration or judgment. For the truth shall be spoken; since of old these evil demons, effecting apparitions of themselves, both defiled women and corrupted boys, and showed such fearful sights to men, that those who did not use their reason in judging of the actions that were done, were struck with terror; and being carried away by fear, and not knowing that these were demons, they called them gods, and gave to each the name which each of the demons chose for himself. And when Socrates endeavoured, by true reason and examination, to bring these things to light, and deliver men from the demons, then the demons themselves, by means of men who rejoiced in iniquity, compassed his death, as an atheist and a profane person, on the charge that he was introducing new divinities; and in our case they display a similar activity. For not only among the Greeks did reason (Logos) prevail to condemn these things through Socrates, but also among the Barbarians were they condemned by Reason (or the Word, the Logos) Himself, who took shape, and became man, and was called Jesus Christ; and in obedience to Him, we not only deny that they who did such things as these are gods, but assert that they are wicked and impious demons, whose actions will not bear comparison with those even of men desirous of virtue.

Hence are we called atheists. And we confess that we are atheists, so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the most true God, the Father of righteousness and temperance and the other virtues, who is free from all impurity. But both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him), and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore, knowing them in reason and truth, and declaring without grudging to every one who wishes to learn, as we have been taught.
From The First Apology

Clement of Alexandria (147-215)
Chapter 1. Exhortation to abandon the impious mysteries of idolatry for the adoration of the Divine Word and God the Father.
Chapter 2. The absurdity and impiety of the heathen mysteries and fables about the birth and death of their gods.
Chapter 3. The cruelty of the sacrifices to the gods.
Chapter 4. The absurdity and shamefulness of the images by which the gods are worshipped.
Chapter 5. The opinions of the philosophers respecting God.
Chapter 6. By divine inspiration philosophers sometimes hit on the truth.
Chapter 7. The poets also bear testimony to the truth.
Chapter 8. The true doctrine is to be sought in the prophets.
Chapter 9. "That those grievously sin who despise or neglect God's gracious calling."
Chapter 10. Answer to the objection of the heathen, that it was not right to abandon the customs of their fathers.
Chapter 11. How great are the benefits conferred on man through the advent of Christ.
Chapter 12. Exhortation to abandon their old errors and listen to the instructions of Christ.

Explore not then too curiously the shrines of impiety, or the mouths of caverns full of monstrosity, or the Thesprotian caldron, or the Cirrhæan tripod, or the Dodonian copper. The Gerandryon, once regarded sacred in the midst of desert sands, and the oracle there gone to decay with the oak itself, consigned to the region of antiquated fables. The fountain of Castalia is silent, and the other fountain of Colophon; and, in like manner, all the rest of the springs of divination are dead, and stripped of their vainglory, although at a late date, are shown with their fabulous legends to have run dry. Recount to us also the useless oracles of that other kind of divination, or rather madness, the Clarian, the Pythian, the Didymæan, that of Amphiaraus, of Apollo, of Amphilochus; and if you will, couple with them the expounders of prodigies, the augurs, and the interpreters of dreams. And bring and place beside the Pythian those that divine by flour, and those that divine by barley, and the ventriloquists still held in honour by many. Let the secret shrines of the Egyptians and the necromancies of the Etruscans be consigned to darkness. Insane devices truly are they all of unbelieving men. Goats, too, have been confederates in this art of soothsaying, trained to divination; and crows taught by men to give oracular responses to men.
From Exhortation to the Heathen

Mathetes (Second Century)
Come, then, after you have freed yourself from all prejudices possessing your mind, and laid aside what you have been accustomed to, as something apt to deceive you, and being made, as if from the beginning, a new man, inasmuch as, according to your own confession, you are to be the hearer of a new [system of] doctrine; come and contemplate, not with your eyes only, but with your understanding, the substance and the form of those whom you declare and deem to be gods.

Is not one of them a stone similar to that on which we tread? Is not a second brass, in no way superior to those vessels which are constructed for our ordinary use? Is not a third wood, and that already rotten? Is not a fourth silver, which needs a man to watch it, lest it be stolen? Is not a fifth iron, consumed by rust? Is not a sixth earthenware, in no degree more valuable than that which is formed for the humblest purposes?

Are not all these of corruptible matter? Are they not fabricated by means of iron and fire? Did not the sculptor fashion one of them, the brazier a second, the silversmith a third, and the potter a fourth? Was not every one of them, before they were formed by the arts of these [workmen] into the shape of these [gods], each in its own way subject to change? Would not those things which are now vessels, formed of the same materials, become like to such, if they met with the same artificers? Might not these, which are now worshipped by you, again be made by men vessels similar to others? Are they not all deaf? Are they not blind? Are they not without life? Are they not destitute of feeling? Are they not incapable of motion? Are they not all prone to decay? Are they not all corruptible?

These things you call gods; these you serve; these you worship; and you become altogether like them. For this reason you hate the Christians, because they do not deem these to be gods. But do not you yourselves, who now think and suppose [such to be gods], much more cast contempt upon them than they [the Christians do]? Do you not much more mock and insult them, when you worship those that are made of stone and earthenware, without appointing any persons to guard them; but those made of silver and gold you shut up by night, and appoint watchers to look after them by day, lest they be stolen? And by those gifts which you mean to present to them, do you not, if they are possessed of sense, rather punish [than honour] them? But if, on the other hand, they are destitute of sense, you convict them of this fact, while you worship them with blood and the smoke of sacrifices. Let any one of you suffer such indignities! Let any one of you endure to have such things done to himself! But not a single human being will, unless compelled to it, endure such treatment, since he is endowed with sense and reason. A stone, however, readily bears it, seeing it is insensible. Certainly you do not show [by your conduct] that he [your God] is possessed of sense. And as to the fact that Christians are not accustomed to serve such gods, I might easily find many other things to say; but if even what has been said does not seem to any one sufficient, I deem it idle to say anything further.
From The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus

Tertullian (160-220)
The principal crime of the human race, the highest guilt charged upon the world, the whole procuring cause of judgment, is idolatry. For, although each single fault retains its own proper feature, although it is destined to judgment under its own proper name also, yet it is marked off under the general account of idolatry. Set aside names, examine works, the idolater is likewise a murderer. You may ask, whom he has slain? If it contributes ought to the aggravation of the indictment, no stranger nor personal enemy, but his own self. By what snares? Those of his error. By what weapon? The offense done to God. By how many blows? As many as are his idolatries. He who affirms that the idolater perishes not, will affirm that the idolater has not committed murder. Further, you may recognize in the same crime adultery and fornication; for he who serves false gods is doubtless an adulterer of truth, because all falsehood is adultery. So, too, he is sunk in fornication. For who that is a fellow-worker with unclean spirits, does not stalk in general pollution and fornication? And thus it is that the Holy Scriptures use the designation of fornication in their upbraiding of idolatry. The essence of fraud, I take it, is, that any should seize what is another's, or refuse to another his due; and, of course, fraud done toward man is a name of greatest crime. Well, but idolatry does fraud to God, by refusing to Him, and conferring on others, His honours; so that to fraud it also conjoins contumely. But if fraud, just as much as fornication and adultery, entails death, then, in these cases, equally with the former, idolatry stands unacquitted of the impeachment of murder. After such crimes, so pernicious, so devouring of salvation, all other crimes also, after some manner, and separately disposed in order, find their own essence represented in idolatry. In it also are the concupiscences of the world. For what solemnity of idolatry is without the circumstance of dress and ornament? In it are lasciviousnesses and drunkennesses; since it is, for the most part, for the sake of food, and stomach, and appetite, that these solemnities are frequented. In it is unrighteousness. For what more unrighteous than it, which knows not the Father of righteousness? In it also is vanity, since its whole system is vain. In it is mendacity, for its whole substance is false. Thus it comes to pass, that in idolatry all crimes are detected, and in all crimes idolatry. Even otherwise, since all faults savour of opposition to God, and there is nothing which savours of opposition to God which is not assigned to demons and unclean spirits, whose property idols are; doubtless, whoever commits a fault is chargeable with idolatry, for he does that which pertains to the proprietors of idols.

We observe among the arts also some professions liable to the charge of idolatry. Of astrologers there should be no speaking even; but since one in these days has challenged us, defending on his own behalf perseverance in that profession, I will use a few words. I allege not that he honours idols, whose names he has inscribed on the heaven, to whom he has attributed all God's power; because men, presuming that we are disposed of by the immutable arbitrament of the stars, think on that account that God is not to be sought after. One proposition I lay down: that those angels, the deserters from God, the lovers of women, were likewise the discoverers of this curious art, on that account also condemned by God. Oh divine sentence, reaching even unto the earth in its vigour, whereto the unwitting render testimony! The astrologers are expelled just like their angels. The city and Italy are interdicted to the astrologers, just as heaven to their angels. There is the same penalty of exclusion for disciples and masters. But Magi and astrologers came from the east. We know the mutual alliance of magic and astrology. The interpreters of the stars, then, were the first to announce Christ's birth the first to present Him gifts. By this bond, [must] I imagine, they put Christ under obligation to themselves? What then? Shall therefore the religion of those Magi act as patron now also to astrologers? Astrology now-a-days, forsooth, treats of Christ — is the science of the stars of Christ; not of Saturn, or Mars, and whomsoever else out of the same class of the dead it pays observance to and preaches? But, however, that science has been allowed until the Gospel, in order that after Christ's birth no one should thence forward interpret any one's nativity by the heaven. For they therefore offered to the then infant Lord that frankincense and myrrh and gold, to be, as it were, the close of worldly sacrifice and glory, which Christ was about to do away. What, then? The dream — sent, doubtless, of the will of God— suggested to the same Magi, namely, that they should go home, but by another way, not that by which they came. It means this: that they should not walk in their ancient path. Not that Herod should not pursue them, who in fact did not pursue them; unwitting even that they had departed by another way, since he was withal unwitting by what way they came. Just so we ought to understand by it the right Way and Discipline. And so the precept was rather, that thence forward they should walk otherwise. So, too, that other species of magic which operates by miracles, emulous even in opposition to Moses, tried God's patience until the Gospel. For thenceforward Simon Magus, just turned believer, (since he was still thinking somewhat of his juggling sect; to wit, that among the miracles of his profession he might buy even the gift of the Holy Spirit through imposition of hands) was cursed by the apostles, and ejected from the faith. Both he and that other magician, who was with Sergius Paulus, (since he began opposing himself to the same apostles) was mulcted with loss of eyes. The same fate, I believe, would astrologers, too, have met, if any had fallen in the way of the apostles. But yet, when magic is punished, of which astrology is a species, of course the species is condemned in the genus. After the Gospel, you will nowhere find either sophists, Chaldeans, enchanters, diviners, or magicians, except as clearly punished. Where is the wise, where the grammarian, where the disputer of this age? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this age? 1 Corinthians 1:20 You know nothing, astrologer, if you know not that you should be a Christian. If you did know it, you ought to have known this also, that you should have nothing more to do with that profession of yours which, of itself, fore-chants the climacterics of others, and might instruct you of its own danger. There is no part nor lot for you in that system of yours. He cannot hope for the kingdom of the heavens, whose finger or wand abuses the heaven.
From On Idolatry

Origen (185-232)
But now, since we are treating of the manner in which the opposing powers stir up those contests, by means of which false knowledge is introduced into the minds of men, and human souls led astray, while they imagine that they have discovered wisdom, I think it necessary to name and distinguish the wisdom of this world, and of the princes of this world, that by so doing we may discover who are the fathers of this wisdom, nay, even of these kinds of wisdom. I am of opinion, therefore, as I have stated above, that there is another wisdom of this world besides those (different kinds of) wisdom which belong to the princes of this world, by which wisdom those things seem to be understood and comprehended which belong to this world. This wisdom, however, possesses in itself no fitness for forming any opinion either respecting divine things, or the plan of the world's government, or any other subjects of importance, or regarding the training for a good or happy life; but is such as deals wholly with the art of poetry, e.g., or that of grammar, or rhetoric, or geometry, or music, with which also, perhaps, medicine should be classed. In all these subjects we are to suppose that the wisdom of this world is included. The wisdom of the princes of this world, on the other hand, we understand to be such as the secret and occult philosophy, as they call it, of the Egyptians, and the astrology of the Chaldeans and Indians, who make profession of the knowledge of high things, and also that manifold variety of opinion which prevails among the Greeks regarding divine things. Accordingly, in the holy Scriptures we find that there are princes over individual nations; as in Daniel we read that there was a prince of the kingdom of Persia, and another prince of the kingdom of Græcia, who are clearly shown, by the nature of the passage, to be not human beings, but certain powers. In the prophecies of Ezekiel, also, the prince of Tyre is unmistakeably shown to be a kind of spiritual power. When these, then, and others of the same kind, possessing each his own wisdom, and building up his own opinions and sentiments, beheld our Lord and Saviour professing and declaring that He had for this purpose come into the world, that all the opinions of science, falsely so called, might be destroyed, not knowing what was concealed within Him, they immediately laid a snare for Him: for the kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers assembled together, against the Lord and His Christ. But their snares being discovered, and the plans which they had attempted to carry out being made manifest when they crucified the Lord of glory, therefore the apostle says, We speak wisdom among them that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, who are brought to nought, which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
From De Principiis (Book III)

Athanasius (296-373)
For now the understanding of mankind leaped asunder from God; and going lower in their ideas and imaginations, they gave the honour due to God first to the heaven and the sun and moon and the stars, thinking them to be not only gods, but also the causes of the other gods lower than themselves. Then, going yet lower in their dark imaginations, they gave the name of gods to the upper æther and the air and the things in the air. Next, advancing further in evil, they came to celebrate as gods the elements and the principles of which bodies are composed, heat and cold and dryness and wetness. 2. But just as they who have fallen flat creep in the slime like land-snails, so the most impious of mankind, having fallen lower and lower from the idea of God, then set up as gods men, and the forms of men, some still living, others even after their death. Moreover, counselling and imagining worse things still, they transferred the divine and supernatural name of God at last even to stones and stocks, and creeping things both of land and water, and irrational wild beasts, awarding to them every divine honour, and turning from the true and only real God, the Father of Christ. 3. But would that even there the audacity of these foolish men had stopped short, and that they had not gone further yet in impious self-confusion. For to such a depth have some fallen in their understanding, to such darkness of mind, that they have even devised for themselves, and made gods of things that have no existence at all, nor any place among things created. For mixing up the rational with the irrational, and combining things unlike in nature, they worship the result as gods, such as the dog-headed and snake-headed and ass-headed gods among the Egyptians, and the ram-headed Ammon among the Libyans. While others, dividing apart the portions of men's bodies, head, shoulder, hand, and foot, have set up each as gods and deified them, as though their religion were not satisfied with the whole body in its integrity. 4. But others, straining impiety to the utmost, have deified the motive of the invention of these things and of their own wickedness, namely, pleasure and lust, and worship them, such as their Eros, and the Aphrodite at Paphos. While some of them, as if vying with them in depravation, have ventured to erect into gods their rulers or even their sons, either out of honour for their princes, or from fear of their tyranny, such as the Cretan Zeus, of such renown among them, and the Arcadian Hermes; and among the Indians Dionysus, among the Egyptians Isis and Osiris and Horus, and in our own time Antinous, favourite of Hadrian, Emperor of the Romans, whom, although men know he was a mere man, and not a respectable man, but on the contrary, full of licentiousness, yet they worship for fear of him that enjoined it. For Hadrian having come to sojourn in the land of Egypt, when Antinous the minister of his pleasure died, ordered him to be worshipped; being indeed himself in love with the youth even after his death, but for all that offering a convincing exposure of himself, and a proof against all idolatry, that it was discovered among men for no other reason than by reason of the lust of them that imagined it. According as the wisdom of God testifies beforehand when it says, The devising of idols was the beginning of fornication Wisdom 14:12 . 5. And do not wonder, nor think what we are saying hard to believe, inasmuch as it is not long since, even if it be not still the case that the Roman Senate vote to those emperors who have ever ruled them from the beginning, either all of them, or such as they wish and decide, a place among the gods, and decree them to be worshipped. For those to whom they are hostile, they treat as enemies and call men, admitting their real nature, while those who are popular with them they order to be worshipped on account of their virtue, as though they had it in their own power to make gods, though they are themselves men, and do not profess to be other than mortal. 6. Whereas if they are to make gods, they ought to be themselves gods; for that which makes must needs be better than that which it makes, and he that judges is of necessity in authority over him that is judged, while he that gives, at any rate that which he has, confers a layout, just as, of course, every king, in giving as a favour what he has to give, is greater and in a higher position than those who receive. If then they decree whomsoever they please to be gods, they ought first to be gods themselves. But the strange thing is this, that they themselves by dying as men, expose the falsehood of their own vote concerning those deified by them.
From Against the Heathen, Part 1

Augustine of Hippo (354-430)
That the Romans Did Not Show Their Usual Sagacity When They Trusted that They Would Be Benefited by the Gods Who Had Been Unable to Defend Troy. And these be the gods to whose protecting care the Romans were delighted to entrust their city! O too, too piteous mistake! And they are enraged at us when we speak thus about their gods, though, so far from being enraged at their own writers, they part with money to learn what they say; and, indeed, the very teachers of these authors are reckoned worthy of a salary from the public purse, and of other honors. There is Virgil, who is read by boys, in order that this great poet, this most famous and approved of all poets, may impregnate their virgin minds, and may not readily be forgotten by them, according to that saying of Horace,
The fresh cask long keeps its first tang.
Horace, Ep. I. 2:29.
Well, in this Virgil, I say, Juno is introduced as hostile to the Trojans, and stirring up Æolus, the king of the winds, against them in the words,
A race I hate now ploughs the sea,
Transporting Troy to Italy,
And home-gods conquered.
Æneid, 1:11.
And ought prudent men to have entrusted the defense of Rome to these conquered gods? But it will be said, this was only the saying of Juno, who, like an angry woman, did not know what she was saying. What, then, says Æneas himself —Æneas who is so often designated pious? Does he not say,
Lo! Panthus, 'scaped from death by flight,
Priest of Apollo on the height,
His conquered gods with trembling hands
He bears, and shelter swift demands?
Is it not clear that the gods (whom he does not scruple to call conquered) were rather entrusted to Æneas than he to them, when it is said to him,
The gods of her domestic shrines
Your country to your care consigns?
If, then, Virgil says that the gods were such as these, and were conquered, and that when conquered they could not escape except under the protection of a man, what a madness is it to suppose that Rome had been wisely entrusted to these guardians, and could not have been taken unless it had lost them! Indeed, to worship conquered gods as protectors and champions, what is this but to worship, not good divinities, but evil omens? Would it not be wiser to believe, not that Rome would never have fallen into so great a calamity had not they first perished, but rather that they would have perished long since had not Rome preserved them as long as she could? For who does not see, when he thinks of it, what a foolish assumption it is that they could not be vanquished under vanquished defenders, and that they only perished because they had lost their guardian gods, when, indeed, the only cause of their perishing was that they chose for their protectors gods condemned to perish? The poets, therefore, when they composed and sang these things about the conquered gods, had no intention to invent falsehoods, but uttered, as honest men, what the truth extorted from them. This, however, will be carefully and copiously discussed in another and more fitting place. Meanwhile I will briefly, and to the best of my ability, explain what I meant to say about these ungrateful men who blasphemously impute to Christ the calamities which they deservedly suffer in consequence of their own wicked ways, while that which is for Christ's sake spared them in spite of their wickedness they do not even take the trouble to notice; and in their mad and blasphemous insolence, they use against His name those very lips wherewith they falsely claimed that same name that their lives might be spared. In the places consecrated to Christ, where for His sake no enemy would injure them, they restrained their tongues that they might be safe and protected; but no sooner do they emerge from these sanctuaries, than they unbridle these tongues to hurl against Him curses full of hate.
From The City of God (Book 1, Chapter 3)

All of the above can be found at New Advent: Church Fathers

Thus, we have demonstrated that early Christian leaders were very much averse to paganism in all of its many forms and were hypervigilant not to be tainted by its faith and practices. Moreover, when we consider the destruction of statues, temples, and writings associated with those pagan faiths by Christians down through the centuries, the narrative that they were somehow tainted by those practices becomes grotesque and absurd!

Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix

Pampered Flurry Family Continues On From Ireland To Cyprus Then To Israel


While ordinary church members are asked to sacrifice and contribute their tithes, the Philadelphia Church of God has its own way of spreading the message: 

a Gulfstream G4 hopping across the Atlantic and Mediterranean. 

Based on estimated operating costs, this Oklahoma City–Ireland–Cyprus–Israel journey and a projected return could represent roughly $154,000 to $212,000 in aircraft operating expenses. 

Apparently, proclaiming the Kingdom comes with a rather impressive travel budget!


Have The Faith And Conviction of Rahab The Prostitute



Focused Upon Abraham While Jesus Is Shoved To The Shadows



Armstrongism has an unusual fascination with the past. Its ministers seem perpetually occupied with Abraham, Moses, David, Elijah, and the prophets, presenting these Old Testament figures as the ultimate examples of faith and obedience. Yet one has to wonder why Jesus Christ and the men and women who followed Him under the New Covenant so often receive comparatively little attention. Crackpot Bob's latest presentation on having the faith of Abraham provides another perfect example of this curious religious backwardness.

There is nothing wrong with recognizing Abraham's faith. He believed God, trusted His promises, and demonstrated his convictions through his actions. Scripture itself commends him. But Crackpot Bob's discussion eventually moves from Abraham's example into the familiar Armstrongist territory of Sabbath keeping, Holy Days, tithing, rejecting Christmas, and supporting the organization's religious mission. Suddenly, Abraham's faith becomes another convenient vehicle for promoting the same old Armstrongist checklist. Apparently, even a discussion about Abraham cannot escape becoming a fundraising and religious-obligation opportunity!

The problem is that Abraham lived before the establishment of the New Covenant. Christians are not called to recreate ancient Israel's religious arrangements but to follow Jesus Christ. Abraham was an important servant of God, but he was not the Messiah, the head of the church, or the mediator of the New Covenant. Those distinctions belong to Jesus, and perhaps Armstrongism should occasionally remember that Christianity revolves around Him.

Jesus taught His followers to love their neighbors, forgive their enemies, practice mercy, serve others, and reject religious hypocrisy. In Matthew 23, He condemned religious leaders who placed burdens upon others while neglecting justice, mercy, and faithfulness. In John 13, He demonstrated servant leadership by washing His disciples' feet. In John 15, He commanded them to love one another as He had loved them. Yet these teachings about humility, compassion, and genuine Christian character often seem to take a back seat to endless discussions about religious observances and organizational loyalty.

And where are the New Testament heroes? What about Stephen, who remained faithful under persecution? Paul, who endured imprisonment and hardship for preaching Christ? Peter, who boldly proclaimed the Savior he had once denied? What about Mary Magdalene, Priscilla, Phoebe, and Lydia, whose devotion and service helped shape the early Christian community? Hebrews 11 celebrates Old Testament examples of faith, but Hebrews 12:2 directs believers to look unto Jesus, the author and finisher of their faith. Apparently, the author of Hebrews understood something that Armstrongism repeatedly struggles to appreciate: the Old Testament examples point beyond themselves to Christ.

The deeper problem is that Armstrongism frequently uses these Old Testament figures to justify importing Old Covenant requirements into Christianity. But Paul's discussion of Abraham in Romans 4 makes precisely the point that righteousness was credited through faith, not earned through religious performance. Abraham was counted righteous before circumcision, a distinction Paul deliberately emphasizes. Ephesians 2:8-10 likewise teaches that salvation is by grace through faith, not works, while making clear that believers are created in Christ for good works. Good works are the fruit of God's grace, not a payment made to secure salvation.

The New Covenant does not eliminate obedience; it places Christian obedience within a relationship centered on Jesus Christ. Hebrews 8:13 speaks plainly about the first covenant becoming obsolete. Yet Armstrongism seems determined to keep dragging Christians backward, recycling Old Covenant practices while insisting that it is restoring authentic Christianity.

Perhaps this explains the constant fascination with Abraham, Moses, and Elijah. Their stories can be conveniently employed to reinforce lawkeeping, religious authority, institutional loyalty, and the familiar Armstrongist prophetic narrative. The New Testament, however, presents a far more challenging standard. Jesus condemned religious hypocrisy, Paul confronted attempts to place Gentile Christians under the Mosaic law, and Galatians warned believers against returning to bondage. Christianity is about transformation through Christ, not simply maintaining an inventory of religious regulations.

Just to be clear, there is nothing wrong with having the faith of Abraham. The real question is why Armstrongism spends so much time looking backward when Christians have been given the teachings, example, sacrifice, and faithfulness of men and women in the New Testament and in church history. Abraham looked forward to God's promises, but Christians have been given their fulfillment in Christ.

Abraham was a man of faith, Moses was a servant of God, David was a king, and Elijah was a prophet. But none of them died for humanity's sins, established the New Covenant, or rose from the dead to become the head of the church. That distinction belongs exclusively to Jesus Christ.

Perhaps Armstrongism should spend less time looking for Abraham and considerably more time actually following Jesus. Christianity has moved beyond Genesis. It is about time Armstrongism caught up.

Monday, November 9, 2026

Armstrongism's Strange Bedfellows: Continually Seeking Credibility From People Outside Its Own Movement

There has always been something remarkably contradictory about Armstrongism. For decades, its leaders have proclaimed that Herbert W. Armstrong restored lost biblical truths, that their particular organization represents God's true Church, and that mainstream Christianity has been deceived. Yet, despite all those claims of possessing exclusive truth, Armstrongism has developed an almost embarrassing fascination with outside personalities, religious commentators, prophetic sensationalists, and organizations that have little or nothing to do with the Church of God movement.

Apparently, possessing the supposedly restored truth isn't quite enough. Armstrongism must continually seek out credibility from people outside its own movement.

Consider Mark Armstrong, United Church of God, Living Church of God, and Bob Thiel's fascination with WorldNetDaily (WND), its personalities and contributors, individuals such as Joe Kovacs, Jonathan Cahn and his The Harbinger phenomenon, and various other religious and political commentators whose teachings and prophetic interpretations appeal to Armstrongite audiences. These personalities become useful allies whenever they reinforce the movement's worldview, particularly its obsession with America's supposed prophetic destiny, national judgment, biblical numerology, end-time catastrophes, and the impending collapse of civilization.

The irony is extraordinary. Armstrongism condemns mainstream Christianity for allegedly abandoning biblical truth, yet readily embraces outside voices when those voices happen to echo its own theological prejudices. Suddenly, people who would otherwise have little connection to the Church of God movement become valuable sources of prophetic insight and religious validation.

But why should a Christian embrace someone's teaching simply because it reinforces what he already believes?

The Harbinger and the fascination with prophetic sensationalism

Jonathan Cahn's The Harbinger became particularly attractive to audiences already conditioned to interpret contemporary American events through an Old Testament prophetic framework. Its central premise draws parallels between ancient Israel's judgment and the circumstances of modern America. 

That approach should immediately raise questions for anyone who understands the distinction between the Old and New Covenants. God's covenant relationship with ancient Israel was unique. America is not ancient Israel, nor does the United States occupy Israel's covenant position simply because a religious commentator discovers similarities between contemporary events and passages in Isaiah.

The New Testament does not authorize Christians to manufacture national prophecies by transferring Israel's covenant warnings to modern political circumstances.

Yet this is precisely the sort of material that appeals to Armstrongism. Having spent decades teaching that biblical prophecy revolves around modern national identities, national punishment, and geopolitical speculation, Armstrongite audiences naturally gravitate toward anyone who supplies another supposed confirmation of their prophetic expectations.

The problem isn't merely that such interpretations may be questionable. It is that they encourage Christians to look for hidden messages, prophetic patterns, and mysterious warnings rather than concentrating on the finished work of Jesus Christ and the responsibilities of living under the New Covenant.

The Berean Call itself published criticism of The Harbinger, questioning its handling of Scripture and its application of Israel's covenant warnings to America. The controversy surrounding WND's promotion of Cahn demonstrates just how easily religious personalities and organizations become entangled in competing claims of prophetic authority.

The WND problem: Borrowing credibility from questionable religious alliances

WND and its associated personalities have also provided a convenient platform for religious ideas that appeal to Armstrongite thinking. When an organization promotes a personality or interpretation that supports their existing worldview, many Armstrongites seem perfectly willing to overlook doctrinal differences they would otherwise condemn.

This creates a peculiar double standard. A mainstream Christian teacher can be dismissed as deceived because he disagrees with Armstrongism, while an outside commentator can be enthusiastically embraced because he happens to promote a theory about national judgment, biblical prophecy, or the end of the age.

That is not biblical discernment. It is confirmation bias dressed up in Armstrongite hypocrisy.

A Christian's responsibility is not to find personalities who reinforce his preferred prophetic narrative. It is to examine every teaching in light of Scripture, including teachings coming from people he admires.

Paul's warning in Colossians 2:8 remains particularly relevant: believers must beware of being taken captive through human philosophy and traditions rather than remaining rooted in Christ.

The deeper problem: Armstrongism never really left the Old Covenant

Here is where the entire discussion becomes considerably more important.

Armstrongism's attraction to these outside personalities is not accidental. It grows out of a theological system that continually returns believers to an Old Covenant framework. Its obsession with national identities, physical blessings and curses, Sabbath enforcement, ceremonial observances, prophetic calculations, and national punishment creates an environment in which modern-day prophetic interpreters become especially appealing.

The movement may speak frequently about Christ, but its theological instincts repeatedly direct attention elsewhere: to Herbert Armstrong, organizational authorities, prophetic personalities, Old Testament national identities, and the latest supposedly significant world event.

The New Covenant, however, establishes something fundamentally different.

Jesus Christ is not merely another personality in a succession of religious authorities. He is the fulfillment of God's promises and the mediator of a better covenant (Hebrews 8:6). The believer's standing before God is not determined by attachment to a religious organization, acceptance of a modern prophet's interpretations, or participation in somebody's prophetic timetable.

The New Testament repeatedly directs believers toward Christ, not toward an endless succession of religious personalities claiming special insight.

Hebrews 1:1-2 establishes the significance of God's revelation through His Son. Colossians 2:16-17 explains that the Old Covenant shadows find their fulfillment in Christ. Galatians 3:24-25 explains that believers are no longer under the former arrangement as their governing covenant authority.

These passages should be enough to make any New Covenant Christian cautious about religious movements that continually attempt to resurrect the authority and obligations of the former covenant.

Why would a New Covenant Christian follow these personalities?

A Christian is certainly free to read books, examine commentary, listen to teachers, and consider different perspectives. Nobody should be expected to accept every statement made by a particular ministry or denomination. But there is an enormous difference between examining someone's material and treating that person as a trusted spiritual authority.

A New Covenant Christian does not need WND, Jonathan Cahn, Kovacs, Herbert Armstrong, Mark Armstrong, Bob Thiel, or any other religious personality to explain why Christ is sufficient. Nor does he need somebody's interpretation of America's political circumstances to establish his relationship with God.

The standard is Scripture, understood through the revelation of Jesus Christ and the New Covenant.

That means rejecting sensationalist prophecy when it goes beyond what Scripture actually teaches, questioning interpretations that transfer Israel's covenant promises and judgments indiscriminately to modern nations, and refusing to give religious personalities an authority that belongs to Christ.

It also means recognizing that somebody can occasionally say something correct without being a reliable guide to Christian doctrine. Agreement on a particular political or prophetic issue does not establish theological credibility.

Conclusion: Armstrongism's borrowed authorities

Perhaps the greatest irony is that a movement claiming to have restored the truths of the Bible appears so dependent upon outside personalities to keep its prophetic imagination alive. One day it is Herbert Armstrong, another day it is some modern prophetic commentator, another day it is WND, and another day it is the latest book promising to uncover some mysterious biblical warning about America.

The personalities change, the sensational headlines change, and the supposed prophetic discoveries change, but the underlying obsession remains.

Meanwhile, the New Covenant continues to point believers in an entirely different direction.

Christ does not need Herbert Armstrong to complete His work. He does not need Jonathan Cahn to uncover hidden warnings in Isaiah. He does not need WND to explain the destiny of America, nor does He need another self-appointed interpreter to reveal some supposedly forgotten biblical mystery.

The finished work of Christ is sufficient.

Perhaps Armstrongism should spend less time collecting borrowed prophets, political commentators, and prophetic celebrities and considerably more time understanding the covenant established through Jesus Christ.

After all, if Christ is truly sufficient, why does Armstrongism continually need somebody else to tell its followers what God supposedly meant?

UCG: Fourth-Generation Faith, First-Generation Fractures: A Testimony of the System Working Exactly as Designed




UCG's Amber Duran, pastor's wife and editor for Beyond Today, has an article up titled "Broken Home: Unbroken Faith" (Compass Check, Fall 2026) on the United Church of God site. It is a personal testimony of a fourth-generation COG member (great-grandmother heard Herbert W. Armstrong on the radio) whose parents divorced when she was young. She describes the pain, the forced choices between parents, navigating Sabbath-keeping at her non-member father's house, finding "family" in the local congregation, learning to forgive, and later marrying equally yoked within the system. It repeatedly elevates God's original design for lifelong marriage, the church as spiritual family, and the liberating power of forgiveness (citing Colossians 3:13, etc.).

On its face, some of the personal reflections and the call to forgive are unobjectionable. The problem is the source and the selective memory.

The Worldwide Church of God (the mother body from which UCG split in 1995) and its Armstrongist offshoots systematically prioritized organizational loyalty and distinctive doctrines over natural family bonds for decades:
  • Early WCG doctrine on divorce and remarriage was so rigid that people in second marriages were frequently required to separate to be baptized or remain in good standing. This produced a class of "spiritual widows" (and widowers) supported by third-tithe funds. Herbert Armstrong later loosened the policy in 1974 partly because it was costing members and creating practical chaos. The article's nostalgia for "God's design" ignores that the organization itself manufactured broken homes under the banner of purity.
  • Herbert Armstrong's own writings on disfellowshipping were explicit. In pieces such as "When One Is Disfellowshipped - Which Family Comes First?" he argued that membership in the "God Family" (the church) took precedence, and that members were to "avoid" even close relatives who had been marked for causing division or offenses "contrary to the doctrine." He invoked Romans 16:17 and 2 Thessalonians 3 alongside Matthew 10:36-37. The natural family was secondary when it conflicted with church discipline.
  • Disfellowshipping (the Armstrongist version of shunning) was a real tool. It was applied for doctrinal dissent, "causing division," or lifestyle issues. While UCG's formal policy today is more measured than the Philadelphia Church of God's hardline version, the inherited culture still treats departure or questioning of core Armstrongist distinctives (Sabbath, holy days, tithing system, exclusive or near-exclusive "truth," etc.) as spiritually dangerous. That pressure has split households for generations.
The 1995 formation of UCG itself was a massive family-and-congregation fracture. When the post-Armstrong Worldwide Church of God under the Tkaches abandoned the distinctive Armstrongist package (British-Israelism, mandatory holy days, non-Trinitarian "God family" theology, etc.), large numbers of ministers and members left to preserve the old system. Critics at the time noted that many stayed until the doctrinal changes became irreversible-when the paycheck and institutional structure were clearly at risk. UCG was created so that ministers could continue being supported by the tithe system while keeping the legalistic framework. The "just so their ministers could still get paid" observation is not invented; it is how the largest offshoots were born.

UCG still counsels strongly against marrying outside the faith, treats unequally yoked situations as inherently strained, and maintains suspension/disfellowshipping procedures for division or habitual unrepentant sin. The article's own author grew up navigating the friction between church rules and a non-believing parent. That friction was not an accident; it is a design feature of the system.

The New Covenant has this to say.

The New Covenant is not a refined Mosaic administration with new management. It is the finished work of Christ that ends the old covenant system of works, days, foods, and priestly hierarchies as the means of standing before God (Galatians 3-5; Romans 7; Colossians 2; Hebrews 8-10).

What it requires of believers regarding family and relationships is straightforward:
  • Forgive as Christ forgave you (Colossians 3:13; Ephesians 4:32). Forgiveness is releasing the claim to vengeance; it does not require pretending sin is not sin or immediately restoring trust where repentance is absent.
  • Love one another and pursue peace (John 13:34-35; Romans 12:18). The law of Christ is love, not institutional loyalty tests.
  • Honor parents and care for one's own household (Ephesians 6:1-3; 1 Timothy 5:8). Jesus' hard saying in Matthew 10:34-37 is real-following him can cost family relationships-but it is about allegiance to him, not to a corporate church hierarchy, a Council of Elders, or a unique set of Armstrongist doctrines. It is not a license for ministers to manufacture division so the organization stays intact and funded.
  • Reconciliation where possible (2 Corinthians 5:18-20). The New Covenant ministry is one of reconciliation, not perpetual marking and avoiding over secondary matters.
Armstrongism inverted this. It made distinctive practices and loyalty to "the one true church" (or the current pure remnant) the measure of faithfulness. The result was exactly the family fractures the UCG article now laments and spiritualizes as refining fire. The church becomes the real family; the natural family is dispensable when it gets in the way of the system.

The personal pain in the article is real. Many children of divorce and many former members of these groups carry scars. But publishing a piece that treats the church organization as the healing family while the same tradition spent decades splitting households to protect its doctrines and its payroll is not prophetic. It is selective. The New Covenant does not demand that anyone keep funding or submitting to a hierarchy that treats natural family ties as secondary to institutional continuity. It demands that people follow Christ, extend grace, and stop elevating man-made walls (whether Sabbath enforcement against family, shunning, or exclusive claims) above the law of love.

Silent Pilgrim

---------------------


I’ll never forget the first Bible study I ever did on my own.

I was in fourth or fifth grade, and my parents had been divorced since I was 4 years old. During one of our weekly Wednesday night visits, my dad sat me down and began to say some not-so-nice things about my church.

“Your church is a cult,” he said, and proceeded to toss a book about cults into my elementary-school lap, which included a section about the Worldwide Church of God.
I timidly shrugged and replied, “I just believe what the Bible says.” I had no idea how to talk to my unbelieving father about what I believed, nor did I ever think I would have to defend my faith to my own dad. But there I was, doing just that.

I was sweating, my stomach churned and I was on the verge of tears. I went home, pulled out my Bible and found every reference I could on divorce. I remember reading Malachi 2:16 and connecting deeply with it: “For the Lord God of Israel says that He hates divorce, for it covers one’s garment with violence.” The truth of that scripture resounded in my heart—this was violence. What once was whole was now in pieces.

The painful separation of my family made me wonder:
How was I supposed to be happy? How could I ever be successful? Would I ever be able to rear a family of my own some day?
Life with an unbelieving parent

I’m what some call a fourth-generation Christian. God started weaving His truth into my family’s story all the way back in the days of my great-grandmother, when she began to listen to Herbert W. Armstrong on the radio.

My mother met my father in high school, and they were married just before her first son was born. She was called and baptized into God’s Church, while my father, who was raised Catholic, never really practiced any religion of his own. My mother raised my two brothers and I in the faith, but because my father never shared my mother’s faith, there was a natural disconnect between them.

I have very little memory of the years my parents were together. Because they split when I was so young, the separation and divorce feel like my first memory of them both—I don’t really remember any part of my childhood when both my parents were in the home together.

Unfortunately, my parents’ divorce was not very amicable and that put my brothers and me in uncomfortable positions far too often. Many times, we were forced to choose which parent we wanted to spend time with, and how often. I can remember the intense inner turmoil and the extreme guilt I felt if I wanted to go with my dad, because then that meant I was leaving my mom alone. The hurt she felt was always plain on her face and in her tears. There was no right choice, but a choice had to be made nonetheless.

Sometimes my dad would take us over a weekend. When this happened, we would have to make personal choices about the Sabbath and how to keep it holy, even when we were encouraged to play video games or go to the mall or a waterpark. As respectfully and quietly as possible, we navigated those waters.

I don’t believe that my parents put me in these positions maliciously. I never believed their divorce was my fault, but that didn’t make life any easier, and I had to grow up quickly. Even if my parents had chosen to remain together, there would always have been some degree of strain or separation between them, because they didn’t agree about God’s truth.
God’s family design

These are issues God never wanted children (or adults) to face, and I share my story with the goal of offering hope and encouragement to you if you’re going through a similar situation. Instead, the Eternal designed marriage to be a lifelong covenant between a husband and wife, and He established the family unit to depict the spiritual family He is in the process of building! Although Scripture recognizes limited circumstances in which separation or divorce may become necessary or permissible, those exceptions do not change God’s original design for marriage

From the beginning, God created us in His image and said, “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:27-28).He engineered marriage to stand as a sacred covenant, where two become one (Genesis 2:24). The marital relationship between a husband and his wife is intended to represent the loving relationship between Jesus Christ and His Church (Ephesians 5:31-32). Children from this union—when viewed how God views them—are considered a blessing, a “heritage from the Lord. . . a reward” (Psalm 127:3)!

Matthew 19:6 says,

“What God has joined together, let not man separate,” and in verse 8, Jesus makes clear that He had only permitted divorce as a concession for “the hardness of [their] hearts.”

Although God’s intended family design wasn’t what I experienced growing up, that didn’t mean He was going to abandon me, and, similarly, He won’t desert you. In Hebrews 13:5 we are reminded that the Almighty will not leave or forsake us; He will not abandon those He is calling. He can provide care, guidance and meaningful spiritual family relationships through His Church. It’s as if He extends His hand to us as a loving Father does, and says, I’ll show you the way. Follow me, child. For me, this way led directly to His Church.

I lived with my mother and had once-a-week visits at my dad’s house after school. I saw my school and Church friends more than I saw my own father, which is odd to think about.

When I would read my Bible or hear sermons at services about God being a Father and wanting to build a family, I paid attention. I needed a family. My brothers needed a family. And we not only found that in God, but in the Church that He gave us.

We found fathers and mothers in our local congregation—men and women with families of their own who took the time to build relationships with us and fulfilled aspects of family for us that we never had. Fathers would take my brothers out hunting or teach them new skills. Mothers would check in to see how I was doing and would take me under their wing. It is truly a treasured gift that God gives to us through the assembly that He calls. To this day, the Church is my family. When members of the Church seek opportunities to practice Galatians 6:10, doing “good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith,” beautiful things happen for a child like me, who found a healthy family life at Church.

When things felt especially hard through the years, Scripture reminded me that difficult times aren’t without purpose. In fact, trials and challenges produce wonderful things!


“That the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:7).

For me and many others, too, that refinement process began at a young age. And even though it’s a painful thing to recollect or reflect on, that pain produced something greater in me: “. . . tribulation produces perseverance; and perseverance, character; and character, hope” (Romans 5:3-4).

Everything I needed for a good life was found in God’s Word and His guidance. I owe my life and success all to God.
A higher calling

Mankind’s track record shows us that earthly families will have problems. Every person makes mistakes (Romans 3:23), and some are worse than others. However, when we learn to forgive at a young age, it can provide us with an incredibly liberating and peace-giving experience. Even when someone has not asked for forgiveness, we can choose to release bitterness, refuse to seek revenge and maintain a heart that is ready to forgive. Reconciliation and the restoration of trust, however, require genuine repentance and demonstrated change. In Colossians 3:13, Paul speaks plainly to the Church of God, reminding them that Christ’s disciples are responsible for “bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.”

In my Christian walk, I’ve come to learn that I love God’s law. Many will claim that it’s a burden that keeps us from doing fun things like going out with friends on the Sabbath or playing sports or participating in tournaments during the Sabbath. But, trust me when I say, those things do not matter as much as you might think they do—they’re so fleeting! And they’re nothing in comparison to the peace and the joy that obeying God brings to you.

Once you’ve chosen to release bitterness and maintain a forgiving heart—not just saying the words because it’s what you’re supposed to do, but deeply and inwardly letting go of the hurt—there’s no greater relief! A very real weight is lifted from your shoulders. You can begin to heal even when reconciliation or restored trust is not yet possible.

I deeply love both my father and mother. I love my stepmother. And my children love them, too. They are my family. I’ve grown up in God’s way and chose to commit my life fully to that way in 2011 when I was baptized. I’ve been married to my wonderful husband for almost 16 years, and we share the same faith. As is discussed in Amos 3:3 and 2 Corinthians 6:14-17, I am enjoying the wonderful fruits of being “equally yoked” with my husband. We are blessed to have two beautiful children learning this way, too. I learned how a family should operate through God’s Word, and I follow His lead.

Every family is different; every divorce is different. For my parents, the divorce wasn’t amicable, though for some it may be. Some families endure much greater turmoil than I. However, one thing is constant, unchanging, timeless—it’s God’s love, faithfulness and commitment toward us (Joshua 1:9; Hebrews 13:8). We can rely on Him, depend on Him, trust in Him.

So, regardless of your circumstances or the challenges in your family situation, remember to lean on the One who is our Creator, who formed us in the womb, knows us completely and loves us deeply (Psalm 139:13-16). Whether you live under one roof or two, you are always at home with God.

Amber Duran lives in Loveland, OH, with her two boys and husband, Andy, who pastors the Cincinnati East and North congregations. She also works as an associate editor for Beyond Today magazine.

Sunday, November 8, 2026

UPDATED: PCG: Flurry Clan Burns More Tithe Money On Trip To Ireland




A Gulfstream G-IV (G4) flying from Edmond, Oklahoma, to Shannon, Ireland, and returning would likely cost approximately $150,000–$220,000 for the complete round trip, depending on fuel prices, flight routing, crew expenses, and whether the aircraft has to remain in Ireland.

That is an estimated aircraft operating and trip cost, not necessarily the amount an organization actually paid.

Estimated flight breakdown

The distance from Edmond to Shannon is approximately 3,697 nautical miles one way, or 7,393 nautical miles round trip.

Flight time, both directions
15–17 hours

Fuel
$50,000–$65,000

Crew and flight operations
$20,000–$30,000

Maintenance and engine reserves
$25,000–$35,000

Airport, landing and handling fees
$5,000–$12,000

Overnight crew expenses and miscellaneous
$3,000–$8,000

These are planning estimates, not an actual invoice. Some categories overlap with published hourly operating-cost calculations, so they should not simply be added together.

If the church owns and operates the aircraft
$130,000–$160,000


Published figures support these estimates:

CRAFT's Gulfstream GIV cost analysis lists charter rates of $14,500–$16,500 per hour and fuel consumption around 447 gallons per hour.

GlobalAir's GIV operating-cost report lists an estimated total operating cost of $8,148 per flight hour.

Guardian Jet's GIV specifications lists a nominal range of 3,800 nautical miles.

One important consideration: The westbound return flight from Ireland to Oklahoma could be more challenging because of prevailing headwinds. The G-IV's published range is approximately 3,800 nautical miles, making this route close to its nominal range. A fuel stop could therefore be necessary, depending on the aircraft configuration, payload, weather and routing.

Bottom line

If we're examining the expense of a Philadelphia Church of God trip to Ireland using this aircraft,  $150,000 is a reasonable working estimate for the round-trip operating expense, while recognizing that the actual amount could be higher.

That's a substantial amount of money to consider when evaluating how church contributions are being spent.  AI sources on estimates