Saturday, August 26, 2023

Why we will not be “God as God is God” – Part 2

“And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them”.

From a post-resurrection appearance of Jesus. (Luke:43-44)


                               Why we will not be “God as God is God” – Part 2

Against the Armstrongist Doctrine of Becoming God

By Scout

“God then purposed to reproduce himself, through humans, made in his image and likeness…” - Herbert W. Armstrong, Mystery of the Ages, p. 94, 1985. 

“It cannot be repeated too often:  We were born for the express purpose of literally becoming equal with the creator of the universe — members in the same eternally ruling God Family-Kingdom. But what will we be like?  Like God!  Exactly! Exactly like God!”  - Robert L. Kuhn, “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

“Thus said the Lord, The King of Israel, their Redeemer, the Lord of Hosts, I am the first and the last, and there is no God but me…”  -  Isaiah 44:6, Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition.  


Part 1 is at: Why We will not be “God as God is God” – Part 1   

Section I (Continued): Ontological Differences between God and Resurrected Humans

Ontology refers to God’s eternal existential nature and essence. I believe this roughly corresponds to Robert L. Kuhn’s concept of being “qualitatively” like God. The question we seek to resolve is whether resurrected humans are ontologically the same as God. If resurrected humans are different from God ontologically, then the God-as-is-God trope fails. Below are some points at issue:

God is not constructed of parts and humans are: Humans are dependent on the functioning of internal body parts for life to be sustained. We are contingent on a beating heart. God does not have parts in his essence. He is not a composite. He is what Thomas Aquinas calls a simple being. A simple being is a free, necessary being. If God is reliant on eternal parts to sustain life, then he is not necessary. He is dependent on something and this means that he is not all powerful. And then there is the chicken and egg crisis. Did the necessary heart, if there were such, come first or did the necessary God come first? And then there is the origin question. Who designed and created the heart so God could have life? These are other similar questions must be resolved in order to support the theory that God has a composite body. 
Humans will have an embodied resurrection as Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 15. The implication of this, drawing on our human experience, is that we will be dependent on our bodies for the full experience of life. We might use the term “packaged” instead of embodied. Our sensory capabilities, for instance, will be packaged in our resurrection bodies. We will have seeing eyes. I doubt they will be there just for ornamentation. Maybe we will have super eyesight that we cannot now imagine but this sense will be implemented in our eyes. An embodied resurrection implies that our bodies will not be superfluous but will be an essential package of capabilities and attributes.

Jesus is fully God and fully man. He is God in essence but also has a body. We will have a body like his in the resurrection (Philippians 3:21). Jesus in his resurrected human manifestation ate fish with the disciples. This implies that his resurrection body had some internal parts that handled the processing of the fish like a human body, even though such processing might be very different from the processing we know. But Jesus, unlike us, is also fully God and so eating fish does not mean he is dependent on bodily functions such as food and a digesting stomach.

Further, if we are comprised of sarx (flesh), psuche (animating principle) and pneuma (spirit), as people in the time of Jesus believed, then our resurrected bodies will also be an assembly of parts. We will lose the perishable parts (sarx and psuche as the ancients believed) and these will be replaced by similar non-perishable parts in which the non-perishable pneuma (pneuma being our personality, consciousness, intellection and mentation) will be housed. At a minimum, in the resurrection humans will consist of two parts: resurrection body and pneuma. If God is not dependent on bodily parts and resurrected humans will be dependent on parts in their resurrected state, then resurrected humans will be ontologically different from God.
God alone is self-existent: God the Father is self-existent (John 5:26). Jesus in his pre-existent state as the Logos was self-existent (John 1:4). Jesus, fully God and fully man, in his present state is self-existent (John 5:26). Paul wrote, in Timothy 6:16, of God “Who only hath immortality (athanasia)”. The Persons of God are self-existent because they are uncreated. Humans will always possess a derivative and contingent existence because they are created (Col 1:16-17), whether in the flesh and blood state or the resurrected state. The uncreated God will create resurrected human beings but it stands to reason that he can also reverse the process and terminate resurrected human beings if he ever so willed. It is not logical that God could do something that he could not undo. This would violate his absoluteness. Because humans, even resurrected humans, have imparted life sustained by God rather than inherent, uncreated life, they are ontologically different from God.

Other issues could be considered. But for purposes of an elementary proof this should suffice. The upshot is that human beings in their resurrected state will substantially differ from God in ontology. And because the difference is in ontology, the very predicate of being, resurrected human beings will not be different from God in just degree but in category. Resurrected human beings will not be equal to God in any sense. They will be subordinate to God both ontologically and economically.

Section II: Our Participation in the Divine Economy

While resurrected humans are not going to share the ontology of God in the future, resurrected humans will share in the divine economy – what Kuhn refers to as being quantitatively like God. Resurrected humans will be immortal, not through self-existence, but through the faithful sustaining of God. Resurrected humans will be equipped for usefulness and servant leadership. And I expect God will delegate to resurrected humans work and responsibilities at a level that is appropriate. What resurrected humans do will be a finite and quantitative involvement and it will be spectacular, but it will not even remotely rise to the level of being God. Everything that God delegates to resurrected human beings will be something he could have done himself. Borrowing a concept from C.S. Lewis, God will give us the dignity of causation. He could do it all himself but he is going to let us participate.

Section III: Why Armstrongism Created the God-as-God-is-God Concept (God Reproducing Himself)

I don’t know.


God-as-God-is-God is something that even Armstrongists do not believe in without qualification. Robert L. Kuhn gave expanded definition to this topic back in the Seventies and stated that resurrected humans will have equality with God qualitatively (ontologically) but not quantitatively (in economy). It is actually the case that resurrected humans will be neither qualitatively nor quantitatively, in Kuhn’s parlance, equal to God. The equality term drops out of the equation. Resurrected humans will participate in the divine economy to a degree but will not be like God ontologically – like what he is in his existential nature. Resurrected humans will not be equal to God in the essence of his being but like him in the application of his energies – much scaled down. The God-as-God-is-God mantra should be replaced by simply referring to resurrected Christians as the “children of God” as the Bible most often does – partakers in but not full possessors of the Divine Nature. Being a child of God is not a bad future.

I believe Armstrongists are unique among those who profess to believe in the God of the Bible in that to assert that God is actually much greater than what HWA thought him to be makes them angry. They seem to want to believe in a limited God who is nothing more than a more powerful human being. It’s as if God is just the big kid on the block. The big kid is just like all the little guys, he is just bigger and so gets his way. But one day, the little guys grow up. This reductionism applied to God, making God to be in our image, makes the idea of God-as-God-is-God seem attainable for humans. Armstrongists can be just like the big kid – maybe so close to being like God, it’s not worth mentioning – perhaps, differing in only a quarter of inch in height. Not only would they rather believe HWA’s words than the Bible, HWA’s homespun words actually suit them – it matches how they want to think about God. But, alas, God is absolute and scales of measurement do not apply to him and Armstrongists need to seriously revise their Doctrine of God if they continue to hold these views.

Kuhn, Robert L. “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.


Sproul, R.C. “What’s the Difference Between the Ontological and Economic Trinity?”: 

Note: This essay analyzes the doctrine of becoming God as presented in Classical Armstrongism. Robert L. Kuhn published in the Seventies.  I do not know how denominations derived from the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) now state this doctrine. Also, the words “ontology” and “economy”, in the theological sense, are nowhere used in Armstrongist literature that I can find.



Gloria in Excelsis Deo

Gerald Flurry: I'm Ok Being A Cult Leader Because Christ Was One Too!

Nothing infuriates Church of God splinter group leaders more than having their little groups referred to as a cult. How dare people do such a thing! After all, Christ was a cult leader just like they are. Since he preaches just like Christ did (supposedly), they are in the same boat that he was when it comes to having epitaphs hurled at them. The problem with that reasoning is not one single COG splinter group leader preaches Christ or even knows him intimately. The new has never been made new and the old still remains old. The new covenant is borderline blasphemy while the old covenant reigns supreme and kills the heart and soul.

When Flurry took his cult to Edmond Oklahoma and started his building campaigns, the local citizenry took notice. Area newspapers and news stations started exposing him in glaring details. That still pushes Flurry's buttons today, much like Bob Thiel still overreacting to Living Church of God kicking him to the curb.

This week Flurry sent out a rerun of his 2007 article whining about the persecution from the local news sources.

Back in 1994, a local newspaper published an article about the Philadelphia Church of God. The author titled the article, “Is It a Cult or ‘God’s Church’?” One subhead was about our unorthodox beliefs—as if that is bad. Webster’s Dictionary describes a cult as “a group with unorthodox beliefs.”

Jesus Christ had unorthodox beliefs! They were so unorthodox that they eventually got Him killed! And make no mistake about it, Christ was killed because of what He taught. The people liked Christ’s personality. “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man” (Luke 2:52). But they hated His message—and they hate Christ’s message today. That condition never changes. “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever” (Hebrews 13:8).

Armstrongism has hated the New Covenant message for decades and still does today. Talk about grace, sanctification, and justification and their noses curl up in mocking disdain. In their eyes, grace is nothing more than the license to sin. Christians are sinners while they, the near-perfect law keepers are the true Christians who conveniently ignore that they are constantly breaking the very law they hawk in their magazines and sermons. A set of laws that none of them keep or can ever keep properly. Heck, they can't even keep the sabbath properly and constantly look to find all kinds of convenient ways to do what they want that day.

Which group hated Christ most of all? The religious people were the ones screaming, “Crucify Him, crucify Him!” False religion continues to play that role today—all over the world. “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world …” (Revelation 12:9). Satan has totally deceived this world. The world’s religions don’t know who God is! Spiritually, they don’t even know themselves!

Flurry and his ilk continue to play the role today of deceiving the world about Jesus. They have no idea who he is because they do not even know themselves! Even the most nominal Christians know far more about Jesus and the New Covenant than any COG leader can ever claim to know.

The reporter had this to say in his article: “During the mid-1950s, he [Mr. Armstrong] published a pamphlet entitled, ‘1975 in Prophecy.’ It warned of a worldwide nuclear war in 1972 and Christ’s return three years later. … When the world didn’t end on schedule, Armstrong withdrew his pamphlet from circulation.” I was asked about this statement before the article was published. I told the reporter that not one of Mr. Armstrong’s critics could prove that statement about the book and they never have over the years! That is because Mr. Armstrong never said those events would occur on those dates. There was only speculation that those events could happen in that time period. I took the time to explain this in detail. The reporter still wrote the same statement without proof. And so the error is perpetuated without excuse! But reporters read such statements and often believe them because there are several critics making these claims. If people hear a statement frequently enough, they often believe it.

See how easily and deceitfully they jump around Herb's false prophecy that the church promoted in the 70's. Flurry and others continue to LIE that Herb and the church ever said such things as fact. 

Religion today has a similar problem. They have heard false teachings for years and they believe these false doctrines rather than what the Bible actually teaches. It will take years for these people to unlearn the errors before they can be deeply taught God’s truth! 

False teachers in the Church of God movement have had a field day over the last few decades as many of them set off on their own in self-righteous indignation and formed new splinter personality cults. They follow the supposed "rediscovery" of lost doctrines and teachings, that God was so incompetent in preserving for 1,900 years, till Herb found it in a Portland library in the 1930's. It has taken COG members decades to discard those erroneous teachings and unlearn the lies and half-truths the church taught.  

One religious author says a cult “is a perversion, a distortion of biblical Christianity and/or a rejection of the historic teachings of the Christian church.” But this is a great contradiction! “Historic teachings” of today’s “Christianity” itself pervert and distort “biblical Christianity”! Their “biblical Christianity” means mainstream Christianity, which is very unbiblical! 

Note the following on how pseudo-Christian cult leaders like Flurry manipulate followers:

"In recent international scientific literature, the authors, for reasons of tolerance and political correctness, normally tend to use such term as the New Religious Movements (NRM). There are a lot of law-abiding, non-violent citizens among the followers of the new occult, mystical, teachings, and postmodern concepts, while a certain percentage of active followers being overt criminals. We fully share the position of those scientists who have a comprehensive approach to this issue, avoiding a biased attitude, or any one-sided tendency to blame all NRM followers [17, 18].

The criminals of the 21st century, who act under the guise of missionaries, preachers, gurus, or spiritual mentors are highly professional. They resort to deception or breach of trust with a wide range of means and techniques, such as persuasion, hypnosis, threats/intimidation (mental violence). But it is the manipulation technologies that are the most efficient and widespread.

Once a victim joins a sect, the organizers do their best to kill his/her moral and ethical attitudes and form emotional dependence on the criminal leader (guru) or the most influential members of the group [19-21]. Such manipulations deprive mentally competent people of the ability to act on their own, turning them into demotivated creatures. The scope of their interests dramatically degrades, with the progressive destruction of the goal-setting ability. Further on, new incentive functions, crucial motives, conclusions (such as you’ve made the right choice) are imposed, and a total restructuring of the victims' conceptual hierarchy takes place. The victim's mindset is deprived of flexibility, logic, and criticality. With all consequent, regular manipulative impacts on the cognitive sphere of victims, the criminals get full control over the helpless state of the followers, making the sect members always committed only to the destructive behaviour model [22-24]."

A little later in the same paper, there is this:

What drives people who being competent turn to semi-legal (sometimes forbidden, destructive and nonconventional) cults, or pseudo-religious groups? 
Consider the subjective circumstances. Firstly, it is the boredom, the idle curiosity, the wish to touch something mysterious, exotic, or merely find some new, unconventional sources of information. The second circumstance is the fact that some people get disappointed in the traditional religions and family values. They feel frustrated about their lives facing a deep spiritual crisis. They try to overcome their frustration and get away from all problems by finding their soul mates. The third circumstance (however paradoxical it may seem) is the desire of some creatively thinking young people (especially those impulsive, prone to making snap decisions, but with no sufficient knowledge on manipulation) to grasp the true essence of the world. Such people are not satisfied with their role as consumers of information garbage. They want to be thoughtful observers of what is happening around them. Therefore, they address sectarians to get the answers to their questions. The fourth circumstance is an evident manifestation of the age-old prejudices and superstitions, which are still very much alive within all social groups and do not depend on the level of education, intelligence, or life experience of an individual. People still believe that esotericism can save them from all their trials and tribulations [48, 49]. Objective circumstances include effective ways to influence the psyche, as well as content created at a professional level. Destructive content captures the imagination of a person and deprives him of criticism. Victims lose the ability to act on their own [50, 51]. Destructive nature of manipulative content, created by leaders of totalitarian pseudo- religious cults

Today's members in groups like the Philadelphia Church of God, Restored Church of God, and the improperly named "continuing" Church of God have lost their ability to act on their own. To think and discern rationally is anathema to the great leader had his demands.

Flurry continues: 

According to the world’s definitions of a cult, Jesus Christ was a cult leader. We must remember that making such statements can bring severe persecution! Christ proved that. He was killed for what He taught. But soon, this world is going to be severely tried for practicing such gross deceit.

Yes, Christ was killed for what he taught, but Church of God leaders will not be persecuted for being Christ's followers when they do not even know the guy. The current "persecutions" today's COG leaders all whine about has nothing to do with "preaching boldly" but everything to do with the asinine teacings they foster off as 1st-century truths

Former WCG Member Lacking In Common Sense Asks Crackpot Prophet Which COG He/She Should Attend


The Great Bwana to Africa and 100 Caucasians posted a "letter" he claims to have received from a former Worldwide Church of God member supposedly asking him which Church of God he/she should attend and support. While I know this is a rerun of a rerun of a rerun, it is still an appalling letter.

This is truly pathetic that a human being with a supposed mental capacity to make decisions and use wise discernment has to ask a certified false prophet and self-appointed splinter group leader what to do! This is appalling in so many ways, not only for this individual but for Bwana Bob too. The Great Bwana Bob Mzungu thought it was a wise thing to post such a humiliating letter of a former member who was incapable of using wise discernment, a person who could not discern which COG to attend and was even blinded to Bwana Bob's cult, the one and only TRUE Church of God. Apparently running the greatest Church of God in human history had no meaning to this poor former WCG member.

He posts:

A while back, I received an email from a former Worldwide Church of God member that included the following:


It boggles my mind that this person had to ask Bwana Bob what to do. This is one of the marks of cults where members cannot make decisions on their own without getting permission from the leadership.

After another little bitchfest about how the Living Church of God ignored him, he wrote:

Anyway, here is what I responded to the former WCG member with:

Dear …: 
As I have repeatedly written at COGwriter, I doubt that David Pack or Gerald Flurry are converted.
I consider that the only COG that is Philadelphian is the CCOG–though not all in CCOG are Philadelphian and there are Philadelphians not in CCOG–but no other COG represents the continuation of Philadelphia. 
You should use God’s criteria, and none other to decide. 
Here are two links you should read and pray about if you are truly serious: How does the Continuing Church of God differ from other Sabbatarian COG groups? 
Does the CCOG have the confirmed signs of Acts 2:17-18? (hyperlinks deliberately removed)
But most refuse to believe and use their own standards. 
Best regards,
Bob Thiel

P.S. The same former WCG member sent me a follow-up email after I posted this. Here is some of what he wrote (Note: This is a different Mr. … in a different COG than the one alluded to above):


My response to the above was to tell him that the COG he attends as well as a group that came out of it do not teach much about prophecy. They also have a lot of prophetic errors. For details on 50+ prophetic errors that the groups other than CCOG have...

One of the biggest false prophets and liars about prophecy is condemning other COG's because they don't talk about prophecy as he does. Some things in Armstrongism never change!

The absurdities in Bob's article ends with this gem of nonsense:

Which Church would Jesus Choose?
If you are looking for a true Christian church, how should you choose? Should you choose based upon any building(s) used? Is the criteria in the Bible? What are some widespread ‘doctrines’ that many churches teach that were not part of the original faith? Do Christians go to heaven upon death? Were early Christians militaristic? What about tradition? This animation addresses those issues and more.

I can state for a fact that Jesus would NOT choose any of the Churches of God considering the pathetic state they are all in, especially Bob Thiel's nightmare of false Christianity.


Friday, August 25, 2023

Things You Never Hear A Church of God Leader/Minister Say: Discover Jesus, Encounter Jesus, Celebrate Jesus, Proclaim Jesus

The above snapshot is from a local church in South Pasadena, CA.

Can you imagine a Church of God ever doing such a thing? Instead, it hides behind closed doors while belching doom and gloom to a negligible part of the world around them. 99.99% of the world has no idea who or what a Church of God is anymore.

This church is in South Pasadena, CA, a small town of 26,000, where almost 1/2 of the population is registered as members at the church with at least 3,500 of those attending church services each week. Most COG's nowadays are lucky to have 30-40 people present on a Saturday or a couple hundred at a Feast site. 

Each week this church provides food for over 300+ homeless or needy families in the area. How many Churches of God feed the needy in their areas? Sure, one or two now collect food and clothing for homeless shelters or food banks at a couple Feast sites, but as soon as they leave the city, where the local population has been watching them dump tons of money for 8 days, they go home and do nothing.

Jesus is rarely talked about but church members know all about the Mystery of the Ages, Herbert Armstrong, the law, which kind of meat is ok to eat, and what time sundown is. Ask most of them what the New Covenant is about and you will get a blank stare. They will tell you what they think it is NOT about, though.

When have you ever heard a Church of God member being extolled to live as a missionary disciple? 

When have you ever heard of a COG encouraging members to build a personal relationship with Jesus? Church members are usually only encouraged to shine the light inwardly to other church members.

When has a COG member been extolled to discover their faith relies entirely upon Jesus and not some book or booklet written by Herbert Armstrong or some self-appointed prophet or even on the law?

Incidentally, this is a local Catholic Church, so-called Christians as Bob Thiel and Armstrongism calls them.

Jon Brisby Warns Elderly Followers To Not Worship Superheroes Because One Day They Will Be One!


From a COGE source:

In the MR-COGE - Mentally Retarded Church of God Eternal, Jon Brisby digs deep into the lint of his spiritually empty pockets and comes up with a doozy of a sermon about not worshipping superheroes (Beware Superheroes) to present to his elderly congregation. I guess he thinks his aged congregants are sneaking those evil comic books into their nursing homes and worshipping images of Batman. Maybe it would be better for those old people to send that comic book money in to the church that way Jon can afford to continue his perpetual world tour which produces zero results.

Jon goes on to tell his mentally retarded congregation that they will one day be super heroes! You know... God as God is!

It appears Jon Brisby is becoming a serious contender in the COG Leader Challenge of producing the wackiest, time wasting sermons, which distract their followers from blowing the dust off their Bibles and learning about the Gospel.


Thursday, August 24, 2023

Why We will not be “God as God is God” – Part 1


Why We will not be “God as God is God” – Part 1

Against the Armstrongist Doctrine of Becoming God

By Anton

“God then purposed to reproduce himself, through humans, made in his image and likeness…” - Herbert W. Armstrong, Mystery of the Ages, p. 94, 1985. 

“It cannot be repeated too often:  We were born for the express purpose of literally becoming equal with the creator of the universe — members in the same eternally ruling God Family-Kingdom. But what will we be like?  Like God!  Exactly! Exactly like God!”  - Robert L. Kuhn, “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

“Thus said the Lord, The King of Israel, their Redeemer, the Lord of Hosts, I am the first and the last, and there is no God but me…”  -  Isaiah 44:6, Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition.  

In orthodox Christianity, there are doctrines of Deification, Sanctification or Theosis. All refer to a process of humans partaking of the divine nature. None lead to the idea that humans will become “God as God is God” which is an expression that has been used by some Armstrongist leaders. Herbert W. Armstrong’s words, short and simple, capture the concept of God-as-God-is-God: “God is reproducing himself.” This language means that resurrected humans will not be just similar to God but will be of the same category as God – in a literal sense equal to God in every existential respect. In Armstrongist literature, this concept was further explained in some detail by Robert L. Kuhn, quoted above, who wrote on the topic of how man is destined to become equal with God. 
To provide context, it is informative that Armstrongists are willing to assert human equality with God but describe Jesus, who is explicitly stated in scripture to be equal with God (Philippians 2:6), often in terms of being subordinate to God. This may be a leftover from the general Arianist view of 19th Century Adventism. Kuhn supports equality but qualifies it. Kuhn is careful to point out that though resurrected humans will become “qualitatively equal” to God, that is, they will have the same existential qualities as God such as being self-existent, resurrected humans will not be “quantitatively equal” to God, that is, God will always be greater in authority, power and intelligence. Qualitative equality, as Kuhn seems to define it, is arguably centered on ontology; whereas, quantitative equality centers on economy. Ontology refers to God’s unchanging existential nature while economy refers to roles, responsibilities, purposes and actions.

We can only assume that Kuhn’s view was also HWA’s view since Kuhn’s statement of the doctrine appeared in print in a leading magazine coming from the Armstrongist press. And what the doctrine states, in theological terminology, is that Armstrongists do not really believe in an unqualified version of the statement “God as God is God.” Rather, Armstrongists believe that resurrected humans will one day be equal to God in ontology but not economy. I believe that the Biblical view is at odds with the Armstrongist view – resurrected humans will be equal to God neither in ontology nor economy. Resurrected humans may participate to a degree in the divine economy through having God delegate activities to his children but resurrected humans will not be equal to God in ontology. This is the topic of this essay.

Note: This essay analyzes the doctrine of becoming God as presented in Classical Armstrongism. Kuhn published in the Seventies.  I do not know how denominations derived from the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) now state this doctrine. Also, the commonly used Christian terms “ontology” and “economy”, in the theological sense, are nowhere used in Armstrongist literature that I can find. 

Section I:  Ontological Differences between God and Resurrected Humans

Ontology refers to God’s eternal existential nature and essence. I believe this roughly corresponds to Kuhn’s concept of being “qualitatively” like God (See reference to Kuhn article at end for a more detailed exposition of his ideas). The question we seek to resolve is whether resurrected humans are ontologically the same as God. If resurrected humans are different from God ontologically, then the God-as-is-God trope fails. Below are some points at issue:


God does not grow but resurrected humans will: Back years ago, a member of the WCG mentioned how amazing it would be to be resurrected and instantly have the mind of God and to know what God knows. I do not recall if it was a minister or lay member, but it is a mistaken notion that no doubt originated in the God-as-God-is-God idea. Isaiah 65:17-18 states, “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create…”. The scope of this passage is clearly prophetic and refers to the time after the resurrection. And God states that he will do the creating and we will rejoice. And this will be an eternal process. This means he will have the knowledge, capabilities and wisdom to create and we will not. God is absolute. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He says, “I am that I am.” This is the language of absoluteness. He will create and we will learn about his creation and how to rejoice in what he creates. He has no need to learn because he made everything, including humans. But resurrected human beings will continue to learn throughout eternity. He will not grow. Being absolute is a binary condition – either you are or you aren’t. There is no gradation. God does not become today twice as absolute as he was yesterday. God will not grow but resurrected humans will. And in this respect, we will be ontologically unlike God.

God alone creates: HWA many times used the analogy of unfinished furniture to illustrate a possible way in which resurrected humans might be given the responsibility of putting the finishing touches on the Cosmos. Terraforming planets, however, is not creation but fabrication – using existing materials and sources. God creates ex nihilo (Hebrews 11:3). There is no support for the idea that resurrected humans might create ex nihilo in scripture.

God states in Isaiah 65:17-18, "But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create”. God creates and we rejoice. Forever. If resurrected humans were going to be "God as God is God", would resurrected humans not be rejoicing in those things that they themselves would create? And if resurrected humans are not creators, they are lacking a fundamental ontological quality that identifies God and Godhood.

God does not have a bodily existence: God is spirit and is not restricted by form. If God had a form as a part his eternal essence, the form would have extension into multi-dimensional space or some equivalent to space. Without this extension, the concept of form does not exist. If God’s form were eternal, so would be the dimensions that his form would occupy. This means that the containing dimensions, phenomena external to God, were not created by God but are uncreated. Then God would not be the creator of all things and John 1:3 would be violated.

And a more subtle point is that if there were eternal uncreated dimensions, they would themselves be Divine and represent a kind of deity in addition to God.The most extensive treatment of the concept of an embodied existence is given in 1 Corinthians 15. If God had a body, the concept could be nicely incorporated into this text. Instead, in 1 Corinthians 15:49, Christians are told that they will bear the image (eikon) of the man of heaven, from context (vv. 45-47) a reference to Jesus who acquired a body as an aspect of his ontology in the Incarnation. We will be similar to Jesus who has a body, being fully man and fully God, not like God the Father who does not.

Humans will experience a bodily resurrection. I Corinthians 15 can be interpreted in no other way. This means that resurrected humans will have locality in space and must travel distance to be at another location. And the traveling of the distance will require time. It may be that resurrected humans will have a much different relationship with time than flesh and blood humans. Perhaps, resurrected humans can transit the cosmos in an instant, but the travel still requires an instant of time. Near the time of the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus, the disciples saw Jesus ascend in his resurrection body. The language of Acts 1:6-11 expresses visibility, time and distance. If resurrected humans have bodies in the spacetime context and God has no body, resurrected humans will be ontologically different from God.

God does not experience time as we do: God created time. Time is a property of the physical universe. It responds to gravity, for instance. As gravity increases, time slows down. If you were in a starship and you approached a black hole, time would slow down because of the increase in gravity. As the starship approached the Schwarzschild radius, time would nearly stop. Time back on planet earth would continue to flow at the same rate. Since God created time, God in his essence is, therefore, timeless. This is not just an imaginary condition. Photons do not experience time as they travel through the cosmos. Further, a photon will experience all the locations along its path of travel through the cosmos at the same time. (Of course, photons are not beings that can experience. Pretend that you are an infinitesimally small, bodyless nano-being, riding on the photon racing along at the speed of light. That is the experience the nano-being version of you would have.)

We can only conjecture on God’s timeless state. Some believe that he does not experience a sequence of moments. There is some traction to this view. If God experiences time as a sequence of moments and has a past, present and future, then he has had an eternal past. This means that it doesn’t make sense that he would ever reach the present that we are experiencing. He would be eternally imprisoned in the infinite time that forms his past and is still passing through that infinite span of time to try to get to the present. That is the paradoxical way that an infinite series of consecutive moments works. And that is the weakness of the sequence of time argument – it leads to Reductio ad Absurdum. Others believe that God does have logical but not physical sequencing in his thoughts and activities. The logical antecedent must precede the logical consequent, for instance. Further, for us time is an organizing principle. The most I can say about that is to state the apophatic principle that God is not chaotic or confused. How he organizes without time, I don’t know.

Humans, on the other hand, now experience and will experience, in the resurrected life, time as a sequence of moments. At the Ascension in Acts 1:6-11, Jesus in his resurrection body experienced motion, time and distance as the disciples watched him ascend. This is data that must be used in the formation of our conclusions. And the conclusion is that God experiences time differently than we will even in our resurrected state, therefore, resurrected humans are ontologically different from God with regard to the fundamental relationship to time.

Fermilab, “Do Photons Really Experience Time?”:

Kuhn, Robert L.  “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.


Sproul, R.C. “What’s the Difference Between the Ontological and Economic Trinity?


(To Be Continued)


Crackpot Prophet Plans To Soon Torture The Entire Planet With His Words

Our favorite crackpot prophet says he will soon do this:

It is my plan to one day cover each and every verse of the entire New Testament...

He continues: 

The Apostle Paul told the prophetic evangelist Timothy to:

2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. (2 Timothy 4:2) 
By intentionally covering whole books of the Bible, we have been doing that. And yes, that does include trying to convince, rebuke, and exhort, which those of you who watched the sermon series on 2 Corinthians 2 would have noticed.

This has to be what the Bible refers to as armageddon! Battling armies could not be as spiritually disastrous as listening to the Great Bwana Bob Mzungu Thiel expound on the ENTIRE New Testament. Humiliated that Fred Coulter has his own version of the Bible in print, the Great Bwana Mzungu has to torture us with his version of how the New Testament should be interpreted.

We can be guaranteed he will rewrite Galatians and other NT books that speak out about the law being irrelevant to Christians. Jesus will still get short-shifted with the law trumping him.

Who needs armageddon when we have Bwana Bob Mzungu Thiel:

Wednesday, August 23, 2023

Rumbling With The Philadelphia Church of God


Those conspiracy-laden boys in Edmond Oklahoma have found fertile ground for their endless stream of conspiratorial pseudo-Christian nonsense

While urging their members and teens to stay off Social Media these guys make full use of it on RUMBLE

For a group that claims to be "not part of this world," they sure love to wallow in its pig slop.

Here are just a few of the topics that PCG is proud to post:

Tuesday, August 22, 2023

True Christians Must Read These Books So They Can Teach In The Kingdom!

It has always been fascinating watching and hearing Church of God leaders expound on how important their writings and teachings are and that those writings are so important that they will be used in the Kingdom of God, whenever it may happen. The arrogance of these blithering buffoons knows no end!

Who in their right mind thinks that a little group of crazy Americans will be teaching the entire world how to live in the world tomorrow? These highly favored Americans are far more important than any of the Christian martyrs who died in the faith and were dynamic leaders of their time. 

The example that COG leaders have set in this day and age sends us a strong signal that that world will be one miserable hell hole to exist in for 1,000 years. Who in their right mind thinks God would place the likes of Gerald Flurry, Bob Thiel, Dave Pack, or Herbert Armstrong in charge of anything in the kingdom of God? Cowardly little men who cannot even talk about Jesus! But, ask them about a strong hand from someplace that wants to spank the world and they can't shut up!

Today, the most pathetic of our current crop of Church of God leaders, the Great Bwana Bob Muzungu Thiel, had this to say about his vitally important writings that will be used as textbooks by teachers in the Kingdom of God:

Now that books are more widely available than in New Testament times, books from ministers can also assist in teaching end time Christians. 
While we have many, the following look to be particularly applicable to the ‘instruct many’ prophecy related to predominantly Philadelphian Christians:The Gospel of the Kingdom of God The Beast power will be promising a humanitarian utopia that he will not truly be able to deliver. 
Philadelphian Christians who understand the gospel of the kingdom will be able to better explain why God’s kingdom is the answer. This booklet is available in hundreds of languages. 
The MYSTERY of GOD’s PLAN: Why Did God Create Anything? Why Did God Make You? This book answers some of the basic questions about the human life and what God’s purpose is. 
Universal OFFER of Salvation, Apokatastasis: Can God save the lost in an age to come? Hundreds of scriptures reveal God’s plan of salvation Most in the world do not understand the plan a loving God truly has for humanity. 
Continuing History of the Church of God This is a short overview of church history and shows that it was the Church of God in Asia Minor and Antioch that stood up against many of the early heretics and that the beliefs of the early Christians are best held by the Continuing Church of God. 
Who Gave the World the Bible? The Canon: Why do we have the books we now do in the Bible? Is the Bible complete? The end time Beast power will feign support of a religion that will be considered as ‘catholic.’ Since the Church of Rome claims it gave the world the Bible, it says it alone has the right to interpret it. This book helps explain where the Bible came from, what the correct books are, what the best manuscripts are, and the fact that it was the Church of God who maintained the chain of custody of the books–not the Vatican or the other Greco-Roman faiths. 
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The true Church of God is NOT Protestant. This book gives extensive details as to why that is so. Plus goes in depth to explain to Protestant and others that it is the Continuing Church of God, and not the Greco-Roman faiths, that best practices sola Scriptura. 
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church While the Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholic churches believe they have the original faith and that is backed up by the writings of those they call the “early fathers,” the reality is that they have deviated from the Bible and early Christian leaders–most of which they call ‘saints’ on many serious and core doctrines. The information in this book is well expected to “instruct many” in the time of the end. 
Now that does not mean our other books and booklets are not important to know–and they can also be referred to–and all are found at the following link: CCOG Free Books and Booklets. 
Non-Philadelphians will not know enough to instruct many in this age. Oh yes, they will teach people during the millennium. But, the lack of knowledge of church history, development of heresies, and proper prophetic understanding will prevent most non-Philadelphians from fulfilling the “instruct many” prophecy in Daniel 11:32. 

What an absolute stinking pile of crap! There is not a single book, booklet, or article dreamed up by the Great Bwana Bob Mzungu that will EVER be used in his mickey mouse kingdom. His kingdom only exists in his narcissistic little mind. Heck, even his so-called "jesus" he rarely speaks about doesn't exist!

Because some of what people in the world will be interested in will be a bit historical, and to them unique, the listed books were written. These books are part of the CCOG preparation for the short work. 
If YOU are willing to be used by God and will support the true Philadelphian remnant leader, God may well have YOU instruct many. Either directly, or at least, indirectly.

Anyone who willingly wants to be used by God will NOT be part of the improperly named "continuing" Church of "god". This is an indisputable fact! 

The Ten Commandments in the Old Covenant


The Ten Commandments in the Old Covenant

Lonnie Hendrix

In the most recent issue of The International News, CGI’s Vance Stinson attempted to refute the notion that the Decalogue’s (Ten Commandments) inclusion in the Old Testament renders it inapplicable to the people of the New Covenant. In The Old Covenant and the Ten Commandments, he challenged New Covenant Theologyauthor Steve Lehrer’s assertion that Deuteronomy 4:13-14 inextricably binds the Ten Commandments to the Old Covenant. Mr. Stinson’s argument against this notion was presented in four points. They are: 1) “no serious theologian would ever claim that the Sinaitic Covenant consisted solely of the Ten Commandments,” 2) “no knowledgeable Bible student claims that all the laws of the Old Covenant pertain exclusively to the people under that covenant,” 3) “New Testament treatment of the Decalogue supports the Decalogue’s permanency and universality,” 4) “All conservative evangelical pastors, teachers, apologists, and theologians, as well as many outside evangelical circles, believe there is an objective universal moral law that has been in place from the beginning of human history..”

In the fourth chapter of Deuteronomy, we read: “And now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the rules that I am teaching you, and do them, that you may live, and go in and take possession of the land that the Lord, the God of your fathers, is giving you. You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you…See, I have taught you statutes and rules, as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land that you are entering to take possession of it…And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today? Only take care, and keep your soul diligently, lest you forget the things that your eyes have seen, and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your life. Make them known to your children and your children's children— how on the day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb, the Lord said to me, ‘Gather the people to me, that I may let them hear my words, so that they may learn to fear me all the days that they live on the earth, and that they may teach their children so…Then the Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of words, but saw no form; there was only a voice. And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and rules, that you might do them in the land that you are going over to possess.” (Verses 1-14, ESV)

Notice that the Ten Commandments were made an integral part of the covenant which God made with Israel. Clearly, this passage of Scripture makes very plain that the Ten Commandments were incorporated into the terms of that agreement between God and the people of Israel. In the words of Mr. Stinson, “no serious theologian” would dispute the notion that the Decalogue was included among the other statutes and promises which constituted that agreement! Likewise, “no knowledgeable Bible student” would dispute the fact that the Old Covenant was made exclusively with the children of Israel. In other words, the terms outlined in Torah (all of the terms) constituted the agreement between God and those people. Indeed, the only way that Gentiles could become part of that covenant was to join themselves to Israel and accept all of the provisions outlined in Torah.

Now, the Epistle to the Hebrews clearly states that the New Covenant renders the Old one obsolete (Hebrews 8:13). Moreover, this same chapter makes plain that the New Covenant is established on better terms and promises than those which underpinned the Old one! Hence, if we accept that the New Covenant was established on different terms and promises, and that it was intended by God to be universal – that is – open to everyone (not just the children of Israel), I would think that the next logical question is: How do the terms of the New Covenant differ from those of the Old Covenant?

According to Mr. Stinson, the New Testament supports the “permanency and universality” of the Decalogue. To support this contention, he noted that the Epistle of James enumerated a couple of the Ten Commandments. More particularly, James wrote: “If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not murder.’ If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.” (James 2:8-13)

Notice that James begins his thought by referring to Christ’s condensation of the Law into two great commandments. He mentions the second one, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Then he went on to say that violating even one of the Ten Commandments makes one guilty of violating the whole! In other words, James message here supports Christ’s summary of the terms of the Old Covenant – Torah (including the Decalogue) – into two great commandments. Moreover, James’ point reinforces Christ’s further distillation of the Law into one great principle (Matthew 7:12) – which, incidentally, was also echoed by Paul (Romans 13:9 and Galatians 5:14) and John (I John 2, 3, and 4).

Although Mr. Stinson went on to acknowledge that “the two great commandments on loving God and neighbor are a summary of the Ten Commandments,” he seems completely unable to comprehend that THIS is the very thing which Christ incorporated into the terms of the New Covenant! In other words, the Decalogue (and I would include the whole of Torah) is an elaboration of those two great commandments. To be even clearer, those two principles comprehend ALL of those individual commandments and render them redundant and unnecessary! The “plain truth” is that those two great commandments constitute the “objective, universal moral law that has been in place from the beginning of human history,” and which are the foundation of the New Covenant. Christ didn’t just fulfill the Law and the prophets by obeying and personifying them – he also fulfilled the Law by distilling it down to its ESSENCE – by making crystal clear God’s original and eternal intent! The people of Israel (operating without God’s Holy Spirit) needed a list of dos and don’ts – which they failed to follow. Christians rely on Jesus Christ and his righteousness and the guidance of the Holy Spirit to achieve God’s original intent (Love) in every aspect of their lives going forward from conversion!

The Decalogue, along with the other individual commandments of Torah, were based on those two great commandments which Christ drew from Torah! ALL of those individual commandments were an elaboration of how those principles (Love for God and neighbor) could be applied to the daily lives of the unconverted, rebellious, and stony-hearted Israelites. Christians (people in whom the Holy Spirit currently dwells) have those two principles written on their hearts. Instead of robotically following a list of dos and don’ts, Christians are learning to apply those universal principles to every area of their lives. To be sure, in so far as the individual commandments of Torah were derived from the same fundamental/universal principles, it would be inappropriate to characterize those commandments as bad, evil, unrighteous, or unimportant. We are, however, clearly stating that it is unnecessary for Christians to wade through this extensive body of legislation and decide which individual commandments are still binding on them under the terms of the present covenant!

Torah (including the Decalogue) is a shadow of the reality that Christians currently possess. Sure, it can help us to more fully understand that reality – who Christ is, what he has done for us, etc.. It cannot, however, replace that reality in our hearts and minds. Christians are circumcised in our hearts, not in our flesh (Romans 2:28-29). Christians rest from our own works in Christ, not by physically observing the Sabbath (Hebrews 4:9-10). We obey the commandments which God has given TO US through Jesus Christ, not by scrupulously observing the dos and don’ts of Torah (Romans 6:14-15, 7:6, and Galatians 5:18). Hence, while the Decalogue was an integral part of the Old Covenant, the principles which underpinned it are an integral part of the New Covenant in Christ.


CGI: Bill Watson’s Doctrine of ‘Changing Life Forms’


Bill Watson’s Doctrine of ‘Changing Life Forms’


By The COG Catholic

Expecting to be disappointed, I listened to CGI elder Bill Watson’s recent Armor of God episode entitled “Are We Immortal?” Unfortunately, my expectations were met.

Bill is a good and likeable guy, but he routinely misrepresents the beliefs of denominations other than his own. This is partly due to ignorance, and I'm afraid partly due to the comfort of sticking with standard-issue Armstrong narratives.

While there is much to criticize in this Armor of God episode, for now I want to highlight the irony of a particularly bizarre charge Bill makes against Christians who believe in man’s immortal soul.

Changing life forms

He claims we traditional Christians believe people “really don’t die, but instead you change life forms into some disembodied spirit and go on living consciously apart from your physical body.”

This is not the first time he has accused Christians of believing we “change life forms.” It’s part of his verbal repertoire when discussing the subject, like saying we believe our “souls waft off into heaven” when we die (I don’t know if I’ve ever heard the word waft outside of COG presentations).

But the truth is the opposite of what he claims: It is he who believes in changing life forms, and it is we in the historic Christian tradition who believe in the bodily resurrection.

What Christians actually believe

Christians from the beginning have always believed that our spirit, or soul, was created ex nihlo by God to be immortal. We are not “inherently immortal,” because only God has immortality inherently. God is, however, able to bestow the gift of everlasting existence to his creatures, just as he did for the angels.

We believe that at the conclusion of our earthly lives, our souls survive bodily death and await a bodily resurrection at the Second Coming. The eternal reward of the just will be enjoyed not in a perpetual ghostly state of “wafting,” but in the body – resurrected, reunited to our souls, glorified and immortalized.

Interestingly, Bill likes to say the concept of the immortal soul comes to us largely from pagan philosophers and gnosticism in the Early Church. But Irenaeus of Lyon (A.D. 130-202) most famously and effectively wrote against the gnostics; he did not adopt but opposed gnosticism.

As one who knew Polycarp (COGs’ favorite Early Church Father), Irenaeus wrote in his work Against Heresies(Book 5, Chapter 7) what we Christians believe regarding the body and the soul and the resurrection:

For this it [the body] is which dies and is decomposed, but not the soul or the spirit. For to die is to lose vital power, and to become henceforth breathless, inanimate, and devoid of motion, and to melt away into those [component parts] from which also it derived the commencement of [its] substance. But this event happens neither to the soul, for it is the breath of life; nor to the spirit, for the spirit is simple and not composite, so that it cannot be decomposed, and is itself the life of those who receive it. We must therefore conclude that it is in reference to the flesh that death is mentioned; which [flesh], after the soul's departure, becomes breathless and inanimate, and is decomposed gradually into the earth from which it was taken. This, then, is what is mortal. And it is this of which he also says, He shall also quicken your mortal bodies. And therefore in reference to it he says, in the first [Epistle] to the Corinthians: So also is the resurrection of the dead: it is sown in corruption, it rises in incorruption. [1 Corinthians 15:42] For he declares, That which you sow cannot be quickened, unless first it die. [1 Corinthians 15:36]

Irenaeus clearly believes in the immortal soul and the resurrection of the body. This is what practically all Christians believe.

But back to the idea of “changing life forms.”

What COGs actually believe

You, the readers of this blog, already know what COGs believe. While they scoff at the idea that death occurs when the soul separates from the body, they insist it involves the “spirit in man” separating from the body. That “spirit in man” – likened to a cassette tape or CD or USB thumb drive that contains a person’s memory and character – goes back to God and awaits a “resurrection” while resting comfortably in a deep soul sleep.

But wait – there's more!

Who really believes in changing life forms?

The irony I alluded to at the beginning of this post is that it’s not historic Christianity, but COGs who teach we will change life forms!

Think about it. COGs mean something very different by “resurrection” than what Christians do.

Christians believe explicitly in “the resurrection of the body,” which, for those who are saved, will be glorified and supernaturalized. It will “put on immortality.” And it will be reunited with the soul.

COGs, on the other hand, believe the body we have now will no longer be ours. They don’t believe “resurrection” means the coming back to life of that which was dead, but the absolute replacement of our old physical body. Our old body will be discarded, while the reawakened “spirit in man” will be inserted into an entirely different, entirely new “other” body that has no connection to our current body.

Back when God first created man, he saw everything he had made and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31), yet COGs say we will no longer even be human beings. Instead, as creatures, we will become a completely different species: “spirit beings” (a nonbiblical term, incidentally). And our bodies will be “made out of spirit.”

Of course, bodies can’t be composed or made out of spirit, since by definition spirit is incorporeal.

So what we have in COG theology is a “spirit in man" that jumps from one life form (human being) to another life form (spirit being), while taking a snooze in between the two states. That sounds an awful lot like a form of reincarnation or a transmigration of souls – an idea as pagan as pagan gets. The only difference has to do with timing and whether the soul is conscious between life forms.

The historic Christian Church takes the Bible at its word. We are mortal because our bodies are subject to corruption. One day our mortal bodies will be made immortal. The saint’s body that goes into the grave is the same body that will come out, except it will be glorified and given everlasting life.

Biblical portrayals of the other side of death indicate consciousness: Lazarus and the Rich Man, the Transfiguration, King Saul and the Witch of Endor, the martyrs crying out for vengeance in heaven.

For the sake of argument, let’s say the soul needs the body for survival (instead of the other way around), and death includes “soul sleep.”

Either way, it is the COG position that most resembles paganism, presenting the “spirit in man” as something meant to escape the fleshly body, to be placed inside a “spirit body,” and to go on living apart from the physical body.

Which is to say, COGs believe the reward of the saved is to change life forms (with a nap in between).



The COG Catholic currently blogs at