I truly feel sorry for the Living Church of God members and how they are constantly being told they are screwing things up. Now they are "drifting off course" due to big bad meanie Satan influencing them. Can these poor people EVER do anything right?
Their entire life seems to be one big mess as they allow themselves to be constantly distracted by trials and temptations because they are unfaithful and losing focus. Because of that, they are in danger of losing their "qualification" status with God, since he is ALWAYS testing them to find out if they are worthy. It has to be a tiresome and weary struggle to be constantly struggling to please an eternally pissed off god such as that.
There is a reason that Jesus said his way of grace, mercy, justice, and compassion was a way that brings true rest.
Matthew 11:28-30
The Message
28-30 “Are you tired? Worn out? Burned out on religion? Come to me. Get away with me and you’ll recover your life. I’ll show you how to take a real rest. Walk with me and work with me—watch how I do it. Learn the unforced rhythms of grace. I won’t lay anything heavy or ill-fitting on you. Keep company with me and you’ll learn to live freely and lightly.”
Stay Focused on Our Mission:
The lessons of history record that mankind and God’s chosen people have drifted off course again and again due to Satan’s deceptive influence. Adam and Eve made wrong choices that sent the course of history off in a wrong direction (Genesis 3). Ancient Israel turned from God and suffered consequences—and modern Israelite nations are heading down this same path. Even individuals called to be saints have turned aside (1 Timothy 1:18–20; 2 Timothy 1:15). Jesus Christ called disciples and raised up His Church to preach the Gospel (Mark 1:14–15; 16:15), to warn the world of the consequences of sin, and to announce events that indicate His return is near (Matthew 24). The mission of God’s Church also involves preparing a people to rule with Jesus Christ as kings, priests, and teachers in the coming Kingdom of God (Luke 1:17; John 21:15–17). To qualify for this challenging and exciting reward, we must avoid being distracted by the trials and temptations of this world (Matthew 13:18–23), and we must remain faithful and focused on our calling and our God-given mission (Matthew 24:13–14; Revelation 3:8–12; 17:14). Let’s each make that our goal!
Have a profitable Sabbath,
Douglas S. Winnail
20 comments:
Just maybe, the leaders who are running the ship are on the wrong track. So, no wonder so many are jumping ship. Or charting a new course.
Is "drifted off course" Winnail's subtle way of taking a jab at Living Education, which no longer employs doctorate-holding Doug or his son, and instead relies on Jonathan McNair who has only an undistinguished B.A. from Ambassador University?
There can be no rest for the COGlodytes because they refuse to enter The Sabbath Rest of the New Covenant.
They reject the work of the Savior, the Lord of the Sabbath, on their behalf; they reject his invitation to true rest and peace in Him.
Instead the weary COGlodytes prefer to tiresomely work for their salvation by sort of obeying some, but not all, laws.
Their ministers don't give them Biblically sound information about grace and justification, so they remain working in the dark about God's plan of salvation.
Poor GOGlodytes!
"The mission of God’s Church also involves preparing a people to rule..."
So I'm practicing by ruling you...
"To qualify for this challenging and exciting reward . . ."
This is a typically Armstrongist statement. It pivots on their unwritten Doctrine of Qualification for Salvation through Works. This could be unpacked in a lengthy exposition but I am going to try to be brief.
The writer claims that becoming a part of a kingdom of priests (Check other translations for the fact that it does not say in the original Greek "kings and priests" - priest is the only vocation - there are no kings.) ruling with Christ is a "reward" which one must "qualify" for through works. Read Revelation 20:6 and you will see that being a priest is an inherent part of salvation not something that is to be earned. If you are in the first resurrection, you will be a priest. So the writer has transformed salvation into something that is earned. This is probably done to make the Armstrongist readers feel that their salvation is uncertain and vulnerable and depends on their strict obedience.
A sidebar is the use of trigger words to incite people who have been programmed to respond. The trigger words are:
". . . to warn the world of the consequences of sin, and to announce events that indicate His return is near . . . "
I am a recovering Armstrongist. I still have the programming that causes me to respond to these words. The average Methodist would read this statement and would not receive the same meaning or respond in the same way. These trigger phrases mean "send more money." The threat that backs this directive is that you will not receive salvation if you don't.
While this statement is couched in cordial language of a personal letter, if you still have Armstrongist programming, you recognize the menace that it conveys.
Another sidebar: The writer uses the terms "kings, priests and teachers." Nowhere in the Biblical text does it include the vocation of "teacher" along with the mistranslaed "kings and priests." I believe this was added to accommodate the Armstrongist lay membership at a lower rank. My guess is that to an Armstrongist leader the idea that a lay member would be a king or a priest is unthinkable. Those are positions reserved for the Armstrongist elite. So a lower rank had to be created.
As with many Armstrongist writings, the subtext often contains more information than the text.
Just another "blame the customer" rant.
Great organizations or individuals never blame the marketplace for failure. They look at themselves and say "How can I be better at providing and supplying the tools and needs of those I serve". You have to be willing to change and learn.
If however, your organization starts with the premise that "they have arrived and are the pinnacle of everything" then you are doomed to eventual failure and disillusionment.
Great Leaders take responsibility for failure of a team , eats the same food as the troops, and looks to themselves on what to change and make better and improved. Blaming your players or customers is for losers!
Another sidebar: The writer uses the terms "kings, priests and teachers." Nowhere in the Biblical text does it include the vocation of "teacher" along with the mistranslaed "kings and priests." I believe this was added to accommodate the Armstrongist lay membership at a lower rank. My guess is that to an Armstrongist leader the idea that a lay member would be a king or a priest is unthinkable. Those are positions reserved for the Armstrongist elite. So a lower rank had to be created.
No. Probably because of his Ph.D., Winnail feels a need to validate his identity as a teacher, which separates him from the mere "priests" who have their Ambassador B.A. degrees in Theology.
Priests are ministers, helpers of the brethren's joy. Winnail by creating the "teacher" role puts himself above a mere helper.
7:39
Aside from the debate over the original text re “kings and priests” I have always looked upon the fact that as “kings and priests” we shall fulfil the roles of such by judging and teaching since a king judged and a priest taught the people.
You poor atheists
LCG seems to be good at creating self-promoters and liars.
Bobus on his Cogwriter site has posted a deceptive comment about former LCG minister Rod Reynolds, implying that he isn't actively serving. But all you need to do is go to Reynolds' YouTube page and you'll see that not only is Reynolds posting weekly content like Bobus, but the content is of far higher spiritual and even production quality!
You can read Bobus' deceptive comment dated 11/13 here.
You can read Reynolds' latest blog post, from September 2020 (not May 2015 as Bobus deceptively implies) here.
You can see Reynolds' videos here.
Reynolds clearly lacks the manic intensity we see in Bobus. However, from his videos you can see that he is a much more pastoral, sane, masculine, and balanced individual.
I am NOT in any way defending the indefensible LCG. Likely, the verse many from the cogs and other more mainstream christian groups use for one role of spirit beings as teachers is:
Isaiah 30:20.
Anonymous (9:30) wrote "Aside from the debate over the original text re “kings and priests” . . ."
I know of no debate about the translation of the phrase that occurs as "kings and priests" in the book of Revelation in the King James Version. The updated translation is "kingdom of priests" or "kingdom and priests." Consult David Bentley Hart's NT translation - it is brutally literal.
I recall a WCG minister observing in a sermon that most of us would be priests in the kingdom - only a few would qualify for the exalted position of king. Armstrongists ever love a hierarchy with special roles for those who are deemed to be in the inner circle. But priest is the only vocation described in the NT.
Some will assert that the word "crown" is used in some NT scriptures to refer to the final status of those saved. Crown is then associated with kingship. This is problematical in two ways. The term is used to refer to everyone so the hierarchy of king, priest, teacher is not acknowledge or accommodated - there would only be kings. Also, Paul uses the term crown in reference to winning athletic contests - a race and a fight.
This seems a small point until you recognize that Christ is our King and arrogating that role to saints in general may not be regarded as good comportment by God.
4.27 PM
But Christ is called King of kings, so there must be kings under Him. I assume that every nation will have its own king, just as Israel will have David as its king.
Anonymous 4:27 PM said...
I know of no debate about the translation of the phrase that occurs as "kings and priests" in the book of Revelation in the King James Version. The updated translation is "kingdom of priests" or "kingdom and priests." Consult David Bentley Hart's NT translation - it is brutally literal.
Basically as I understand it there are 2 major underlying texts used for our English NT. The Textus Receptus is used as the basis for the KJV. However, most other modern English versions follow the Critical Text. There are hundreds of variants between these two texts. Thus, the TR has the Greek "basileis" translated as "kings" in Rev. 5:10 in the KJV/NKJV while the CT (aka Nestle-Aland or morphological GNT) has the Greek "basilian" translated as “kingdom" in versions like ESV, NIV, RSV etc.
Re DB Hart's NT Translation it follows the Critical Text, which explains why he translated Rev. 5:10 with "kingdom." I just read a funny comment left by a reviewer who stated "his 'brutally literal' translation is frequently merely 'brutal' without being 'literal.'
Some will assert that the word "crown" is used in some NT scriptures to refer to the final status of those saved. Crown is then associated with kingship. This is problematical in two ways. The term is used to refer to everyone so the hierarchy of king, priest, teacher is not acknowledge or accommodated - there would only be kings. Also, Paul uses the term crown in reference to winning athletic contests - a race and a fight.
As you've noticed as have I the Greek word translated "crown" as referenced in the NT and by Paul in particular by way of the Greek Olympics I believe would be more appropriately translated as "wreath" and so the "crowns" the saints will wear on their heads wouldn't be like the type of crowns we've been accustomed to witnessing in European royalty. But, that's just my view anyhow.
You leave out the cruelty Tonto.
Blaming the brethren leads to justfying many a cruel act.
But those that do, have to live with each other, which can be far worse than the cruelty they do to others.
God sees, God knows.
Anonymous (9:44) wrote "I just read a funny comment left by a reviewer who stated "his 'brutally literal' translation is frequently merely 'brutal' without being 'literal.""
I regret having used the word "literal." It is surcharged with so much fundamentalist nonsense as to be meaningless.
Anonymous (6:32) wrote "But Christ is called King of kings, so there must be kings under Him."
This may be so. Or it may be just a means of exaltation, a literary hyperbole. It is a leap that requires scriptural support, however, to go from this spare and equivocal phrase to the idea that some or all resurrected saints will be kings. One might argue if we are not these kings, then who would be. But keep in mind that the current world is under "thrones, principalities and powers" and this is not a reference to human beings.
I believe the 18th Century philosopher , Denis Diderot got it most correct in his famous quote: “Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.”
8.14 AM
Christ is called King of kings and Lord of lords. Rev 21:24 states that the kings of the earth will bring their glory to Jerusalem. Every organisation, even criminal organisations and street gangs have their "kings," including the demonic realm which you mention. So some resurrected saints will be kings. Slapping the label "literary hyperbole" on near fundamental reality is stupid.
Anonymous (9:46) wrote "Slapping the label "literary hyperbole" on near fundamental reality is stupid."
One might might conclude that you are following the Gerald Waterhouse Principle of Exegesis. Waterhouse used to say things like "You don't have to interpret it. You can read it right there in your Bible. That's what it says." To Gerald, it was "fundamental reality."
Phrases like "King of Kings" have to be placed in context - they cannot just simply be lifted. For instance, what about this phrase in Deuteronomy:
"For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible . . ."
Would even Gerald conclude that this was a blatant statement of polytheism? It might be "literary hyperbole." Literary Hyperbole is, however, an inadequate expression because God transcends all hyperbolic statements that are logical. He is never overstated in his perfection. But within the context of limited human language it is a useful description of literary device. It means that this is praise language and not necessarily the foundation for forming a policy statement concerning governmental structure. In other words, Christ may be "King of kings" but technically speaking, there may be no other kings in the sense that he is a king. How are we to know what it really means? May be we won't in the present Age. That doesn't bother me. I no longer need material for a sophomoric speech in Spokesman Club.
Back to "God of gods" - this apparently was stated in historical context when ancient Israel was monolatrous - they believed that Yahweh was a god among other gods. He was their national god but greater than the other gods. It was only later that monotheism was introduced and understood (although Armstrongists continue to believe in polytheism). The point is we cannot give the scripture a Gerald Waterhouse "once over" and be done. These issues require a midrashic examination.
Doug wrote: "...Jesus Christ called disciples and raised up His Church to preach the Gospel (Mark 1:14–15Open in Logos Bible Software (if available); 16:15Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)), to warn the world of the consequences of sin, and to announce events that indicate His return is near (Matthew 24)..."
******
Doug stresses the return of "another Jesus" is "near!" Where is He? How many more years and guesses does Doug need. What specific events "indicate His return is near," because God's Kingdom is scheduled to come, but not soon?
There are none, as He does not return to reign on earth until after Satan is loosed from the bottomless pit, and after Satan as Gog, 7th head of the Beast, enters Jerusalem (Zech 14) causing tremendous destruction, which was not stopped by Jesus Christ. Nor will Doug's "another Jesus" be reigning on earth to prevent that destruction. Time for such things happening is not near, but time will tell.
Doug also commented saying: "... The mission of God’s Church also involves preparing a people to rule with Jesus Christ as kings, priests, and teachers in the coming Kingdom of God (Luke 1:17Open in Logos Bible Software (if available); John 21:15–17Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)). To qualify for this challenging and exciting reward, we must avoid being distracted by the trials and temptations of this world (Matthew 13:18–23Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)), and we must remain faithful and focused on our calling and our God-given mission (Matthew 24:13–14Open in Logos Bible Software (if available); Revelation 3:8–12Open in Logos Bible Software (if available); 17:14Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)). Let’s each make that our goal!..."
******
Doug's goal is for SELF striving to qualify for something: "to rule with Jesus Christ as kings, priests, and teachers in the coming Kingdom of God." Doug's goal focuses on self, which we know will not ever glorify in God's presence (I Cor 1:29). Doug is following the advice of another Jesus.
Jesus Christ gave us this goal (Matthew 6:33) with a focus on 2 things: "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." Matthew 6:33
Wouldn't Doug prefer to follow and yield to the words of Jesus Christ, rather than yield to "another Jesus" with other goals?
Time will tell...
John
Post a Comment