I was sent this by a person today inquiring if the Churches of God were actually a "fellowship"?
This is in response to a newsletter that Craig White sends out:
Notice that Vic Kubik uses the term “Church of God fellowship” in the 8th paragraph. This is similar to the term “Church of God community” that some use (including me).
What it means is that many of the Church of God groups are recognised as part of the Body of Christ and it is well and truly fine for us to visit and network with the other groups. It is against UCG policy to work against that or prevent it. We are not a cult nor do we believe we are the only true Church.
The other day Victor Kubik posted a letter where he talked about fake news and how UCG was the source of real truth since they have the Logos as their ultimate source and he referred to
This is in response to this comment by Kubik.
For the first time since the research has been conducted, the quantitative results from the report
showed that media was viewed as both “incompetent” and “unethical.” A majority (59 percent)
believe that journalists are “purposely trying to mislead people by saying things they know are
false.”
The outcome? “This is the era of information bankruptcy,” declares the report. “The global
infodemic has driven trust in all news sources to record lows.”
It’s important to note that these numbers represent journalists and media on both ends of the
spectrum—liberal and conservative. And government doesn’t fare any better.
What is disturbing about this for us in the Church of God fellowship? Follow-up research
conducted a few weeks ago found that a majority (57 percent) of Americans interviewed noted
that divisiveness is so extreme that they believe the United States “is in the midst of a cold civil
war.”
No wonder that President Joe Biden delivered an inaugural message on Jan. 20 that called for
calmness, unity and a lowering of political temperatures. Sadly, in the weeks that have followed,
fresh rancor and divisiveness have reared up again on both sides.
How should we in the Church of God respond?
Most people I have spoken to said this is not the case that COG groups form a fellowship. While there may be a few that do let ministers from other groups speak on occasion, they are not bound in bonds of fellowship in belief or governance.
There particularly are no bonds of fellowship with personality cults led by men such as Dave Pack, Gerald Flurry, Bob Thiel, or Ron Weinland. These charlatans are at enmity with other COG's due to their narcissistic arrogance, their dreams, outlandish visions, absurd prophecies, and perverted visions of governance. None of these men allow their ministers to speak in other groups and most certainly will NOT allow any minister from another COG's speak. Can you imagine crackpot Bob Thiel allowing Gerald Weston to speak in his group?
Even those that share ministers on occasion are NOT in bonds of fellowship. They all have different doctrines and beliefs that prevent true unity and true bonds of fellowship.
Certain Churches of God love to mock other Christians and make fun of how many groups there are, but they are just as broken and fractured as the ones they mock.
18 comments:
The Armstrong groups are certainly FELLOWships in that there isn't room for LADIES to do anything other than sit to the side and gossip.
When there is a corporation and unaccountable, unelected hierarchies , the term "fellowship" is not appropriate.
The word "fellow" itself implies equality.
Rather than a fellowship it is very cliquish actually. You are either in or out but its always precarious no matter what.
Is Christ divided? - 1Cor 1:13. No.
“Is there really a Church of God 'fellowship'?”
That is debatable.
The so-called COGs are better known for their DISFELLOWSHIP custom.
Craig White lives in fantasy land most of the time. To him, there is no greater theologian than Herbert Armstrong. He is also a huge idol worshipper of British Israelism. Caucasians are in danger of extinction due to BLM. To him, God's chosen race is the white race. He is quite racist in his writings anymore.
He also has been searching for decades trying to get a copy of every booklet, article, magazine, sermon, etc that was ever preached by HWA, Meredith, Hoeh, and others, pre-1986 of course. He is consumed by his idolatry of Armstrongism.
"Anonymous Anonymous said...
Is Christ divided? - 1Cor 1:13. No.
February 11, 2021 at 6:07
In the Church of God, it is nothing but division!
Scratch the surface of the ACOGs and one finds that gang mortality rules supreme. The sermons role is to morally disarm and brainwash the victims into compliance. For instance, the LCG has a sermon online where the minister rails against selfishness (ie, self interest), self-will (ie, independence) and self desire. It's an attack on any trait that gets in the way of blind obedience to ministers whims. Such tyranny is always government of the irresponsible, by the irresponsible, for the irresponsible.
These groups do not have Gods approval.
Fellowship?! Kidding me?
The churches of god, ALL of them including the original ‘world wide’ are CULTS.
Their doctrines are the doctrines of cults. Their leadership behaves like cult leaders. Their rules are those of a cult. Their misuse and twisting of the scriptures is that of a cult. Their abuse (emotional and financial) is cult practice.
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Agree Jack that's how it is.
HWA's brand was "the plain truth". Thus he claimed to have the truth divinely revealed by God and channelled through him. He claimed to be God's end-time prophet, through whom God restored truth that had been lost for nearly 2,000 years. So not only did he claim to have the truth, he claimed he had it uniquely and exclusively; that no one else had it or _could_ have it, because that was the way God was working.
Since HWA died, there have been many claims of inheritance of this mantle of plain truth. Because it's such an exclusive thing, each claimant to this mantle is obliged to point out the reasons why others _don't_ have it.
This inherited dogma is a recipe for division. It's also a recipe for jaded and disappointed members, because once they get to know a minister well enough to see a single flaw, the whole dogma unravels itself, because the dogma implies perfect truth and by implication, exclusive goodness. Eventual disappointment and disillusionment is quite likely, and they may well wander off looking for the "real true church". Thus all the leaders and churches seeking to perpetuate HWA doctrine are likely to be "hoist with his own petard".
I've grown up in this, and I'm tired of seeing the endless division of those who feel obliged to split every time they see someone has some doctrinal flaw or personal problem. And yet, I see I'm jaded myself, because while we should be patient with others' flaws, it's hard to be patient with someone who is flawed while insisting that they're in the exclusive "the true church" and that they alone have all truth, and by implication, exclusive goodness.
There's no remedy to this division except for abandoning this idea of truth exclusively held. Recognise that God works with flawed people, such as Jacob, David, Hezekiah, Peter, even Barnabas; the church in Corinth; the 7 churches in Revelation. We even see doctrinal growth that occurred in the early New Testament church in the scriptures (eg the calling of Gentiles, the debate over circumcision of Gentiles). The message from Jesus to the 7 churches in Revelation shows not perfect churches, but people in need of correction of wrong ideas and repentance of sin.
If the ACOG's are fellowships, where's the love?
ACOG's are all the same. Most have twiggy differences of doctrine. PCG and RCG being the most extreme. But on the fellowship, throughout them all, is dynasty ruling families intermarried within other approved cliquesof dynasty ruling families.
The is no fresh, constant supply of new people for the fellowship to be anything else.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Is Christ divided? - 1Cor 1:13. No.
==========
Totally. The evidence is everywhere
I agree with much of what 4:09 AM has written, and could further point out that the claim of "truth exclusively held" by HWA and others could be characterized as a modern form of Gnosticism.
As has been pointed out multiple times on this blog and elsewhere, much of what HWA claimed to have exclusive understanding or knowledge of was actually taught and written about during the late 1800s and early 1900s by others. He borrowed ideas from other religious teachers, claimed these things to be direct revelations from God, and used that claim to promote himself and what became his own church. He coupled these teachings with the promotion of prophetic speculation with an overarching theme of imminent tribulation followed by the return of Christ, and an implied promise of physical safety as well as greater rewards for those "few" God called to follow the leader of the "Philadelphia era" which was of course himself.
The majority of men in leadership positions in the COGs today have no real interest in networking or "fellowship" between the groups, because doing so would undermine their own perceived power structures and call into question their own claim of authority within "God's government." After all, if you are claiming to be the "ranking" ecclesiastical authority through which God is working, to acknowledge that God might also be working through others becomes problematic if you want to keep people loyal to yourself, or your own group. In order to maintain the perception of your own power or authority, or justification for your own corporate club, it becomes necessary to maintain separation from others making similar claims. This is done either through implication or direct statements, with the underlying idea being that people need to follow "you" because "you" are more "right" in some area, or have more "truth" than someone else, and to listen to or cooperate with others then becomes tantamount to compromising the "truth" and by extension one's loyalty to God. But, as 4:09 pointed out, this argument begins to unravel the minute a flaw or error in teaching is found in a particular leader, which is inevitable, because there are no perfect leaders, giving people the dilemma of which flaws and errors to overlook and ignore, and which ones to pay more attention to in trying to navigate between the various groups.
Having said that, while networking or genuine fellowship between the hierarchies of the groups in most cases is resisted or at least not actively pursued, there are lay people who do have the desire to fellowship and network with others. This is especially true among the younger people. Much of this is done on line and privately, without the direct involvement of any official COG corporate oversight. Most of the people involved still hold to basic teachings on the Sabbath, holy days, etc. but they are also more likely to engage in open Biblical discussions, and are more willing to acknowledge that growing in grace and knowledge is a process and no one person or group has the corner on "all" truth, and that the body of Christ isn't contained by corporate church walls, which is a departure from traditional corporate church behavior, even if some among the leadership occasionally pay lip service to these things. Like the person who made the above comment, most of these people are sick of the constant division, and have taken matters into their own hands to try and remedy the situation.
Concerned Sister
Concerned Sister,
I am drawn to Church of God, Eternal the sole heir to the original Radio/Worldwide Church of God teachings. Am I on the right track?
You are not on the right track Anon 11:42!
ALL the churches of god are cults! Get out whilst you still can
Doug Winnail wrote:
******
"...The New Testament Church began on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and is referred to numerous times in the New Testament as the “Church of God” (1 Corinthians 1:2 ; 10:32 ; 11:22 ; 15:9 ; Galatians 1:13 )...The “work” of God’s Church continues today, preaching the Gospel of the coming Kingdom of God, warning the Israelite nations and the nations of the world about the consequences of turning away from God, and preparing people to rule with Jesus Christ in the coming Kingdom...."
******
A couple of things came to mind. Doug says that God's Church "began on the Day of Pentecost," but others were added to God's Church on Pentecost b/c God's Church began about 3 1/2 years earlier with its first member, Jesus Christ, after He was baptized and received God's Spirit "descending and REMAINING on Him. (John 1:33) Jesus was its first member.
Doug says his group is to preach/warn "the Israelite nations and the nations of the world about the consequences of turning away from God."
Who are those Israelite nations and where did they turn away from God? After all, they (including even some in the living group?) do not even know God. How do we know? Jesus told us the following:
"O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me." John 17:25
2,000 years ago, the world did not know The God, the Father! How much do people know Him today? Any better?
And Doug's Mickey Mouse Millennium..His Jesus to soon return to reign on earth! Where is He? What's the hold-up? Maybe those of Living group need to know Him, God, more?
Could Doug and Weston, both driven by another spirit, be preaching another gospel and another Jesus?
How confident are Doug, and Weston, that they really are "...preparing people to rule with Jesus Christ in the coming Kingdom..." Is that coming kingdom right around the corner?
Could that kingdom be soon coming? How soon? Before the 7 Trumps? Before 7 Vials?
Could that kingdom come before Satan exits the pit?
Could that kingdom come AFTER Satan exits the pit? After 7 Trumps? After 7 Vials?
Could that kingdom come after the second resurrection occurs?
Could that kingdom come 1 year after the second resurrection occurs?
Time will tell...
John
Post a Comment