The Real Mystery of the Ages
By
Lonnie Hendrix
Not long before his death, Herbert Armstrong published a compilation of some of his writings which he titled Mystery of the Ages. In terms of a comprehensive theology, it is probably the closest that he ever got to such a thing. The premise of the book was that God had revealed to Herbert Armstrong seven great mysteries that had perplexed humankind throughout their history on this planet. Even more mysterious than the mysteries, however, was the fact that they had been extracted from the same Scriptures which Jewish and Christian scholars had had access to for centuries! According to Mr. Armstrong, prior to him, no one had ever figured this stuff out! Indeed, according to him, “The clergy and theologians of organized ‘Christianity,’ therefore, cannot and do not understand the Holy Bible.”
To Herbie, the Bible was a “coded book” – “like a jigsaw puzzle” with thousands of pieces which needed to be assembled in just the right way to reveal these mysteries. He wrote that “The Bible itself is the basic mystery that reveals all other mysteries.” Armstrong, of course, claimed that he had assembled the puzzle pieces correctly and demystified God, angels, humans, civilization, Israel, the church, and the Kingdom of God. Why had everyone else missed these fundamental “truths”? Armstrong claimed that God had revealed these mysteries to HIM, and that only the folks whom God “called” and gave his Holy Spirit would be able to comprehend what had been revealed to HIM!
Unfortunately, although Armstrong’s Worldwide Church of God later rejected Mystery of the Ages as heretical and riddled with errors, much of the membership continued to believe that the book was crucial to a proper understanding of the Bible. Although many of the lay members would eventually acknowledge that there had been problems with church administration and/or governance, they would continue to insist that the “core teachings/doctrines” of the church had been sound. In other words, they continued to believe that God had revealed these seven mysteries to Mr. Armstrong and had chosen to hide them from the religious and secular scholars of the world at large! After all, it did wonders for the ego to imagine yourself as having been singled out for a special understanding that wasn’t available to the intellectual elite of the world!
The first mystery which Herbert claimed to have deciphered was focused on “who and what is God?” While most of Catholic and Protestant Christianity had embraced a Trinitarian view of God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), Armstrong insisted on a Binitarian view of God (Father and Son). Like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Armstrong taught that the Holy Spirit was NOT a personage – that it was a force which was used by God to accomplish his will. Armstrong, of course, had to explain away a great many passages which suggested personality for the Holy Spirit and basically ignored Christ’s instruction to baptize new believers “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19, NIV). Moreover, Armstrong embraced an anthropomorphic view of God which limited God and made him into the image of a human! For Herbert and his followers, God was an extremely angry individual who was ready to zap most of humanity at a moment’s notice and forcibly impose a “benign” dictatorship over humanity. In other words, Armstrong’s god is NOT one that most of us would recognize or equate with THE GOD!
As for the angelic host, Armstrong taught that angels were immortal – even though Paul told Timothy that only God is immortal (I Timothy 6:16). Herbie also taught his followers that angels originally had the same potential as humans – that God intended for them to live on the earth, finish, and rule over it. For the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, however, angels were “ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation” (Hebrews 1:14). Indeed, a little further into the letter, we read: “It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking.” (2:5) In fact, Mr. Armstrong taught that God had created humans as mortal beings because of the failure and immortality of the angels! However, in that same epistle to the Hebrews, we read: “For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father?’” (1:5) In other words, God is NOT working on plan B! The angels NEVER had mankind’s potential – not ANY part of it! Moreover, ALL of the scriptures which address the fate of Satan the Devil speak of him eventually being consumed by fire and ceasing to exist! (See Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28, Revelation 20)
Next, Armstrong claimed to have special insight into the mystery of man. He correctly taught that Satan had deceived the whole world (Revelation 12:9), but then he turned right around and exempted himself and his followers. Everyone was deceived EXCEPT him and his followers! Moreover, Armstrong claimed that God was only calling a select few into his Church in the present – that salvation was not currently being offered to the majority of humankind. Even though Christ had instructed his disciples to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:19) and Christ himself declared that he came here to save the whole world (John 12:47). Armstrong claimed that John 6:44 should be interpreted as God limiting salvation to a select few – NOT that God was calling/inviting everyone to come to Christ. Also, in this connection, Mr. Armstrong failed to focus on the reason that Jesus Christ came to this earth as a human. In the epistle to the Hebrews, we read: “Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.” (Hebrews 2:14-18)
Hence, in this first part of a two-part post, we have seen that Herbert Armstrong did NOT understand the mysteries which he claimed to reveal in Mystery of the Ages! We have seen that Armstrong did NOT understand who and what God is. Likewise, we have seen that his understanding of both angels and humans was very flawed and misleading. In the second part of this post, we will see that Mr. Armstrong also did NOT understand the forces behind human civilization, who Israel was (and is) and how they related to prophecy, the nature and structure of the Church, or the nature and organization of the Kingdom of God! In other words, Herbert Armstrong’s theology was/is hopelessly flawed and does NOT represent a proper understanding of any of the so-called mysteries which he claimed to have revealed! Stay tuned.
30 comments:
It is true there are puzzle pieces which God slowly and freely distributes to real Christians individually, not 1 person. It is like small puzzle sections working it's way into the main puzzle. That takes years way before us and after us. Armstrong wanted the focus on Himself, certainly not Jesus.
I think Scripture is more analogous to a museum of fine art than a jigsaw puzzle. All of the individual "paintings" reflect the inspiration of the "artists" who "painted" them. The individual "paintings" can be organized according to subject matter and style and reflect various themes which can and do tell a larger story when viewed as a whole. Afterall, Scripture is a compendium of literature composed and edited over a long period of time by many different individuals. Yes, the human authors were inspired by God, but the interpretation of their works also requires Divine inspiration. In other words, the inspiration isn't just in the giving but in the receiving of the information as well. A jigsaw puzzle must be assembled by someone to view the picture. There's only one way to put it all together - no interpretation is needed. Like the works of art in a museum, the perspective of the person viewing the individual portraits is often just as important as the perspective of the original artist in being able to appreciate and interpret the work.
I'm not aware of HWA ever saying that Satan and his demons will not be eventually destroyed. There's also a multitude of scriptures pointing to the concept of the select first fruits. Any person can be entering God's kingdom by building Godly traits, but that's not a passport to the bride of Christ status.
And there are indications that humans are the expression of plan B. The fact that God has spent the last 14 billion years designing all the new vegetation and creatures for the re created Earth implies that God was hoping that plan A would work. Otherwise why not create the present planet and then the angels?
It's an interesting question as to why humans can under a hundred years out grow angels who have existed for billions of years. That Satan and his demons went backwards also means that they have the capacity to go forwards. But they haven't. One of life's mysteries.
I think most of the mysteries were already doctrines of the COG7 long before Herbert arrived on the scene.
Lonnie Hendrix wrote:
“Mr. Armstrong failed to focus on the reason that Jesus Christ came to this earth as a human.”
HWA had a divided view on the reason for human life. On the one hand, he taught the mistaken idea that man was destined to become “God as God is God”. And on the other hand, he taught that the ultimate purpose of the church and its membership was to support the work financially. The former view exalted man and the latter view reduced man to an economic chattel. These dissonant ideas were both preached from the pulpit although I heard much more of the economic chattel view than the God as God is God view.
It was common for him to angrily accuse the laity of trying to “get” salvation as if salvation were a just a commodity and not the central purpose of God’s plan for man. His gospel then became a statement about the announcement of the utopian Kingdom of God with all the attendant predictive prophecies. His gospel was not the Christian gospel of the salvation of humanity through the sacrifice of Jesus, concisely stated in John 3:16. This was a kind of error of synecdoche where a part of the picture was made to become the entire picture and causing the exclusion of other essential parts. HWA stated in a 1978 telecast titled “Church in Action”:
“They think they (laity of the WCG) are called to get, get, get salvation. Satan is the great getter…Now the purpose and function of the church then number one, to back up the apostles as they, as their part, that is the churches part of backing the apostles in the great commission…”
From the context, it is easy to see that he is referring to the WCG membership existing for the purpose of providing financial support for headquarters operations and media activities. It is appalling that he categorizes and desire for salvation as a Satanic desire. This is a view that supports business operations rather than the majesty of God's purpuse. If one considers his God as God is God view, it is paradoxical.
Under Joseph Tkach Senior, I noticed a marked shift away from HWA’s viewpoint. In a Worldwide News article Tkach wrote a watershed column that exalted the idea of the salvation of humanity rather than the primacy of financial support to The Work. I mentioned this to a local minister, a very sharp guy, and pointed out that this statement was revolutionary – a departure from everything we had ever heard. He seemed first puzzled and then stunned and had no further comment.
Excellent review of MOA. I look forward to part 2.
Krischan
Fantastic article Lonnie. Of all HWAs heresies, his binatarian teaching and his utter lack of fundamentally grasping Who Jesus is and why He died for us, are the two worst and most severe. He had these people worshipping two gods, not One, and to me, that cut the doctrine believing member off from any relationship with God. Whoever still believes this most damnable heresy and teaches it to others (like crazy Bob), has made themself none of God. Add to that, their genuinely clueless stance on Jesus and you have a spiritual disaster on your hands. That is the clearest reason why these groups never lived up to the hype they put out. A church has got to be based on the fundamental truth of Who God is, as He revealed in His Word. HWA found a gimmick and to hell with the truth found in Scripture.
What I do not get is why the current crop of Armstrongism adherents, both leaders and members, cannot see that the old version failed because it was based on heresies, so why would attempting to best replicate it be any different? It was a man made religion and ANY off shoot from it will come to nothing as well because the foundation was wrong. Just look at the utter failure of these groups, doing an invisible work, most of whom are imploding before our very eyes. But why they cannot see it, is just beyond me.
"The penalty of sin by the angels was not death-for God had made them immortal spirit beings who cannot die." - page 92 "Mystery of the Ages"
9.26 am, "spirit being who cannot die" is not the same as cannot be destroyed.
Ezekiel 28:18 states that Satan will be destroyed by a fire within, so I doubt that Herb would outright contradict a scripture.
MOA is truly the most boring book that Armstrong ever published. It is so riddled with errors that even Gerald Flurry had to change parts of it. No real follower of Christ would be using anything said in this book.
A scientist allows his research to be peer reviewed, then the studies are replicated to test for reliability. Linus Pauling, Nobel Prize winning chemist did some medical research and made the claim that Vitamin C can prevent, treat the common cold and some forms of cancer.
Peer reviews showed that his research was flawed, and replication of the studies came up with less favorable results. HWA would never allow theologians from other groups to review his research. Extraordinary claims, common with HWA, require extraordinary proof.
Lack of peer review is also why HWAs church labelled reading "dissident" literature pornography. The Jehovah's Witnesses which closely parallel Herbs church, also teaches that reading literature other than their own is pornography. I agree with the dissidents claim that part of the bibles "prove all things" involves reading outside literature. It takes a miracle from God to discern the true identity of the two goats on the day of atonement. Meaning that spotting a counterfeit often requires an out side source, be it God or a good article or book. An outside source is sometimes the only way to perceive lies and distortions.
DW says, Herbert's binitarian teaching had people worshiping 2 Gods, not 1? Apparently you don't understand the binitarian concept! Look it up. It's one God composed of 2 beings, not 2 Gods!
Also, the binitarian heresy cuts one off from a relationship with God? I'm assuming by that you are saying one must accept the trinitarian version of the Godhead in order to be saved? If that's the case, what about your poster boy, the thief on the cross? How much of the technicalities of the Godhead did he understand?
Exposing yourself again "Lonnie" for all the wrong reasons. Since when did CGI members EVER have any interest in Mystery of the ages book ?????
It was known as a joke in CGI. But here you are pretending to be what you're not.
Just to clarify, HWA did not believe in Binitarianism. He believed in Bi-theism. The COG (7th Day) believes in Binitarianism but they assert their belief is not the same as HWA's. HWA makes this very clear in MOA (I am glad he wrote MOA, so that we have his beliefs on record.)
"There might be a man named John. And John might be with the man named Smith, and John might also be Smith because John is the son of Smith, and Smith is the family name. Yet they are two separate persons." (MOA, pp. 42-43)
This is a form of polytheism known as bi-theism. To say that two persons are united in a family does not mean binitarianism. To say that two person are united by the Kingdom of God is not binitariansim. Those are both bi-theistic statements. To say that two persons are united in one spiritual essence/substance/nature is Binitarianism. And, of course, it is a mystery what this consubstantiality actually is. (Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" without explaining the phenomenon.) What we do know is that it is not two separate beings as HWA asserted. HWA was simply a polytheist. All the WCG lip service paid to "God is a family!" does not make it otherwise.
The UCG's statement on this is somewhat confusing. They believe that the Father and Jesus are two separate beings which is Bi-theistic like classical Armstrongism. But they say that the Father and Jesus share the same eternal existence. The question is do they mean the same ontological essence or do they mean that they are just both eternal. Only the latter comports with the idea that they are separate. My guess is that UCG is also polytheistic.
Krischan
You can read almost anything you want into the bible. It's a smorgasborg. Essentially, you can invent your own religion and then justify it from "The Word of God."
A scientist allows his research to be peer reviewed, then the studies are replicated to test for reliability.
Your concept of how science works is different from the way it is actually practiced in the real world where nice guys get washed away like the snow in the rain.
I remember Rod Meredith talking about this HWA book and saying there were four errors in the book. Now he didn’t specify what those errors were but there were way more than that. People tried to equate this book as the Bible at one point. Armstongism!
This book illustrates a typical pattern in the lives of people who fancy themselves as quasi-Biblical Messianic guru types. They seem compelled to lay down an alternative testament, followed by their devotees, and considered to be equally important to the New Testament of the Bible. The Koran of the Muslim faith, and the Book of Mormon of the Latter Day Saints are certainly earlier and better known examples. So, yeah! HWA's "Mystery of the Ages". The ministers always stated that we members were part of a new book of Acts that would be read by everyone being taught "God's Way" (Armstrongism) in the Millennium, and Hundred Year Period.
Of course, it's all ego and vanity, and very presumptuous to believe we could be part of an addition to the Bible. Seems like there is a well known warning at the end of Revelation, but certain people and personality types somehow believe that they are so important that they are exceptions. They also do this with the warning that no man can know when Christ is returning as well, and have their human reasoning to support them as exceptions.
Isn't that "special"?
Anonymous Wednesday, May 17, 2023 at 2:23:00 PM PDT,
This post had NOTHING to do with CGI (they're not mentioned in the article). I do write about other things on occasion (most of the time)!
To BP8. You really don't like my theology. This is not your first rant at my beliefs. How about we agree to disagree? Respect would be appreciated. If, however you would prefer to debate, I will gladly give my private details to Banned and we can discuss.
Btw, my comment about the Trinitarian view is biblical. Binitarianism completely leaves out the Holy Spirit, who is also Almighty God. He even sits on the Throne of God. So I get the concept, but strongly disagree. I wish you the best.
DW
Did you think my comment was too harsh? I was just repeating what you said! Your beliefs are your beliefs. I have nothing against them, I'm trying to understand them.
You have commented before that salvation was by grace through faith and not based on a multi-step process or a bunch of do's and don'ts. You have used the Thief and the Phillipian jailor as examples of those knowing very little but still receive God's blessing. THEN you want to make the ambiguous doctrine of the Trinity, with all its technicalities, a test with dire consequences of being cut off from God. To me, that's harsh!
You also talk like heresy and orthodoxy are exact sciences. They are NOT! 41,000 Christian denominations in this world demonstrate that fact.
There is no need to debate. We do that with every post here on Banned, and although that is very entertaining, nothing really gets resolved. You are right, we can agree to disagree with no hard feelings.
BTW, binitarianism does not deny or leave the HS out. What it has is a different perspective on what the HS is, which is not evil or blasphemous. Believing in it will not disqualify one from the Kingdom.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1988 reprint, vol.3, page 917, states "the HS in the New testament is personally less distinct than the Father and the Son, and His divinity less clearly stated. He appears as a nearly transparent agent for God and Christ. One properly concludes that the New testament is overall clearly binitarian in its data, and probably? trinitarian".
May 17, 2023 at 6:21AM & 10:57AM
TBH I'm now agnostic regarding the origin of the devil and feel it's moot.
I understand the traditional view that Satan was the angel Lucifer who rebelled and convinced 1/3 of the angels to join him to oust God off His throne.
I also understand related to this view is that God made the angels to inhabit the pre-Adamic earth.
But, after reading Ralph Woodrow's book "Was Satan Once an Angel in Heaven?" (http://ralphwoodrow.org/assets/books/PDF/satan-angel.pdf) some time ago now I'm no longer sure since it's been argued that the few scriptures that have been used to create a backstory to the origin of the devil have been taken out of context to build up this false narrative. So it's even possible that God created the devil completely evil as an entity that is His complete opposite and then He allowed the devil to enter the Garden of Eden to tempt Adam and Eve into sin.
I'm also agnostic now regarding the "gap theory" of Genesis 1:1-2 as I've seen some solid arguments that the traditional view to support this theory that the original earth "became" without form and void is actually a wrong translation and interpretation.
Irrespective of the origin of the devil, however, I do believe at present that the devil and his angels will die and cease to exist in the lake of fire.
Of course it's all at present speculation and just theories. Not until the Messiah returns will all the world finally be granted to know the truth about everything that we've wanted to know about this or that, which God has kept hidden for millennia.
4:30 PM
The confusion regarding HWA's theology about the "God family" stems from imo it being sourced from Mormonism, which has a completely false view of God as well.
Having said that, however, it's my view that God the Father is God Almighty while Jesus Christ is the Son of God. The latter sits at the right hand of the former. At present I know of various people who have a COG background reexamining the nature of God and Jesus eg Is Jesus a God too or only the Son of THE God? Did Jesus exist as an immortal being prior to His incarnation? etc Atm I would concur with Binitarianism (definitely not Trinitarian) as I believe that Jesus was the "angel of the LORD" in the OT and was the One who was seen and spoken to by various people of God in the OT (eg Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, etc). But, I remain open to correction.
Writing 24/7 allegedly.
Did Herbert Armstrong actually write Mystery of the Ages ?? Rumours abound that Aaron Dean wrote parts of it. Various names claimed over the years to have written parts of it as well.
Only PCG idolise the book. Its been left to gather dust by nearly all the other ACOG groups.
1:25 writes:
“I believe that Jesus was the "angel of the LORD" in the OT.”
Zec 2:9b and ye shall know that the LORD of hosts hath sent [shalach; LXX, eksapostello] me
"Agent (Heb. Shaliah): The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum, "a person's agent is regarded as the person himself" (Ned. 72B; Kidd, 41b). Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principal, who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequent complete absence of liability on the part of the agent" (R.J.Z. Werblowsky & G. Wigoder, The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, p.15).
Ge 19:18 And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my Lord [Adonay - used by the MT only to refer to God]:
"... So when the Lord said, "I will go down and see," the reader is led to the conclusion that, as in chapter 18, "the men" in chapter 19 represented the Lord's presence with Lot" (John H. Sailhamer, Genesis, EBC, Vol.2, p.150).
It is suggested that an ancient Near Eastern hearer or reader would not have necessarily drawn the conclusion that The Angel of the Lord was a God-being. It is only in light of the NT that The Angel of the Lord can be identified with Jesus Christ.
Principal - Matthew
Mt 8:5a And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum,
Mt 8:5b there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him,
Agency - Luke
Lk 7:1b he [Jesus] entered into Capernaum.
Lk 7:3b he [the centurion] sent unto him the elders of the Jews, beseeching him
One could be forgiven, if one read only Matthew's account, that Jesus and the centurion literally met face to face and spoke directly to one another. But Luke's account records that it was the principal's agents that met face to face and spoke to Jesus. Matthew records the encounter from the principal perspective while Luke records it from the agency perspective. That is, from Matthew's perspective, what was committed by the duly appointed agents of the centurion was regards as having been committed by the principal, the centurion, even though Christ and the centurion never met.
"... in the context of the ancient Near East ... messengers normally spoke for the sender. We see this phenomenon throughout the prophetic writings of the Old Testament. When the prophets brought God's message to Israel, they typically spoke for God in the first person; e.g., "The Lord said, ‘I am bringing a nation against you,' " rather than, "The Lord said that he is bringing a nation against you"..." (Peter Enns, Exodus, NIVAC, p.96).
Ac 7:30 And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.
"... in this context, the evidence is insufficient to conclude that Stephen is referring to Christ. We say rather that "the angel bears the authority and presence of God Himself" [Alford, Alford's Greek Testament, vol.2, p.75]" (Simon J. Kistemaker, Acts, NTC, p.258).
I marvel how many books that critique Armstrongism get it wrong by saying "the God family" doctrine and the Mormons "family of Gods" doctrine are one and the same or that HWA borrowed it from them. That is totally false! Research for yourself. Those concepts are not the same and not even close. They might use some similar terminology and wording but that's about it. At least Armstrong bases the God family on certain scriptural references while the Mormons use pure conjecture and supposition.
R.L.Sumner, in his book "Armstrongism", 1974, boasts that his book is based on his own personal examination of Armstrong's published material. He even has a chapter titled, " Armstrong's Family of Gods". Sorry pal, it doesn't exist. You will not find any written material by the Church using such words! I say, if you are going to attack someone's teachings, at least get the terminology right!!! Otherwise you have no credibility!
Wow. So many words and the confusion remains. Really didn't JESUS come to explain and clarify and simplify all things??
Re the "God family" doctrine according to J. Phillip Arnold in his study "Who taught HWA?" published in "The Journal" some years back (www.thejournal.org/issues/issue202/jx013118.pdf) he claims the source was the founder of Jehovah's Witnesses CT Russell not Mormonism. Of course, this then begs the question where did Russell get it from? Maybe Joseph Smith? Just askin'...
Russell and Armstrong's concept of being "born again to immortal spirit life" are almost identical, except Russell restricts the privilege to his heavenly class of the 144,000, while Armstrong opens it up to all mankind! Unlike Armstrong, Russell never uses the term "God family". See " The Divine Plan of the Ages", 1907 edition, Chapter 10, "Spiritual and Human Natures Separate and Distinct".
It's hard to say where Russell got it (I'm sure they would all say, " the Bible")! I do know that both Russell and Armstrong's versions are very different from Smith's Family of Gods!
Post a Comment