Will You Be Ruling Over Ten Cities?
In my last post, I discussed how Herbert Armstrong confused human notions about governance and the exercise of authority with God's conception of those things. Indeed, we demonstrated that his failure to comprehend the profound differences between the two models led him to twist the meaning of the Kingdom of God! To be more precise, we made it very clear that Armstrong's emphasis on GOVERNMENT and RULERSHIP was misguided, and it twisted his understanding of what the Gospel of the Kingdom of God was all about. In this post, we will demonstrate that it also twisted his understanding of one of Christ's parables about the Kingdom (It actually twisted Armstrong's understanding of many parables, but we don't have the space or time to go through all of them here).
In the nineteenth chapter of Luke, we read:
11 The crowd was listening to everything Jesus said. And because he was nearing Jerusalem, he told them a story to correct the impression that the Kingdom of God would begin right away. 12 He said, “A nobleman was called away to a distant empire to be crowned king and then return. 13 Before he left, he called together ten of his servants and divided among them ten pounds of silver, saying, ‘Invest this for me while I am gone.’ 14 But his people hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We do not want him to be our king.’
15 “After he was crowned king, he returned and called in the servants to whom he had given the money. He wanted to find out what their profits were. 16 The first servant reported, ‘Master, I invested your money and made ten times the original amount!’
17 ‘Well done!’ the king exclaimed. ‘You are a good servant. You have been faithful with the little I entrusted to you, so you will be governor of ten cities as your reward.’
18 “The next servant reported, ‘Master, I invested your money and made five times the original amount.’
19 ‘Well done!’ the king said. ‘You will be governor over five cities.’
20 “But the third servant brought back only the original amount of money and said, ‘Master, I hid your money and kept it safe. 21 I was afraid because you are a hard man to deal with, taking what isn’t yours and harvesting crops you didn’t plant.’
22 ‘You wicked servant!’ the king roared. ‘Your own words condemn you. If you knew that I’m a hard man who takes what isn’t mine and harvests crops I didn’t plant, 23 why didn’t you deposit my money in the bank? At least I could have gotten some interest on it.’
24 “Then, turning to the others standing nearby, the king ordered, ‘Take the money from this servant, and give it to the one who has ten pounds.’
25 ‘But, master,’ they said, ‘he already has ten pounds!’
26 ‘Yes,’ the king replied, ‘and to those who use well what they are given, even more will be given. But from those who do nothing, even what little they have will be taken away. 27 And as for these enemies of mine who didn’t want me to be their king—bring them in and execute them right here in front of me.’”
In his explanation of this parable, Herbert Armstrong wrote: "Now notice in verse 17, the one who had gained ten pounds is given authority to RULE CITIES - 'have thou authority over ten cities'! To the one who had gained five pounds, he said, 'Be thou also over five cities.' This is speaking of the SECOND COMING OF CHRIST and of His delegating authority to rule to saints converted during this Christian era, between Christ's first and second appearings (sic) on earth. This parable, then, was spoken to make clear to us that the Kingdom of God is a literal GOVERNMENT, to be set up AT CHRIST'S SECOND COMING - and not before!" - Just What Do You Mean - Kingdom of God? Armstrong also observed on another occasion "Some resurrected saints will rule over ten cities, some over five (Luke 19: 17 -19)." - Tomorrow - What It Will Be Like
Unfortunately, Mr. Armstrong always had trouble interpreting symbolism because of his obsession with literalism. He seems to have forgotten what a parable is! In their article, What is a Parable? Christianity.com provides this definition of a parable: "A parable is a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels. The word "parable" comes from the Greek word 'parabolē,' which means 'comparison' or 'illustration.' Parables typically employ everyday situations and characters, making them accessible to a wide audience." In the writings of Herbert Armstrong referenced in the preceding paragraph, he seemed to understand that the nobleman represented Christ, but he quickly abandons any notion of symbolic meaning and declares that this passage means that resurrect saints will be ruling over literal cities in God's Kingdom! In other words, he is making the parable conform to his understanding that the Kingdom of God is all about "GOVERNMENT."
Now, let's return to the parable itself and reread it without Mr. Armstrong's obvious bias. According to Luke, why did Jesus give this parable? Didn't he tell them this story "to correct the impression that the Kingdom of God would begin right away?" Isn't it obvious that Christ's disciples had the same obsession with a literal, human-like kingdom that Herbert Armstrong developed? Didn't Christ's disciples think in terms of Christ overthrowing Roman rule and restoring the Davidic Kingdom? In this connection, please review Acts 1:6-8. Do you think that the parable is about actual money being distributed to Christ's disciples? Is it possible that the story is pointing to the gifts of the Holy Spirit being distributed to them? Is it possible that the story is suggesting that those servants should be about the business of growing in grace and knowledge - developing the fruits of that Spirit which were entrusted to them? Is it possible that the story is suggesting that those individuals who have grown the most in love, kindness, and mercy will be the greatest in the Kingdom? Indeed, wouldn't such an interpretation be more consistent with our understanding of the definition of a parable? What do you think?
One more thing. All of this brings another passage of Scripture to mind. In the thirteenth chapter of Matthew, we read:
10 His disciples came and asked him, 'Why do you use parables when you talk to the people?'
11 He replied, 'You are permitted to understand the secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven, but others are not. 12 To those who listen to my teaching, more understanding will be given, and they will have an abundance of knowledge. But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken away from them. 13 That is why I use these parables, For they look, but they don’t really see. They hear, but they don’t really listen or understand.'" (Matthew 13:10-13, NLT)
Is it just me, or does that suggest anything to you about Herbert Armstrong's status as a disciple of Jesus Christ?
Posted by Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix
"...those individuals who have grown the most in love, kindness, and mercy will be the greatest in the Kingdom?"
ReplyDeleteThe Bible teaches to live by EVERY word of God rather than cherry picking the odd scripture. Lonnie's above statement paints a picture of a soft on crime society. We already have that today. To criminals, all that's real is what they can get away with, so the kind, mercy, etc approach doesn't work. Christ quoted David from the book of Psalms. This affirmed David's many prayers asking God to deal firmly with the wicked.
https://godcannotbecontained.blogspot.com/2024/08/by-every-word-that-comes-from-mouth-of.html
DeleteSo you're saying I can't practice for controlling 10 cities by playing "Risk"? :-)
ReplyDeleteI love playing "Risk" Go for it :-)
Delete"... those individuals who have grown the most in love, kindness, and mercy will be the greatest in the Kingdom? "
ReplyDeleteBoth. It sounds like those that have grown the most will oversee the most during the millennium.
Miller wrote, “Unfortunately, Mr. Armstrong always had trouble interpreting symbolism because of his obsession with literalism.”
ReplyDeleteThis is a very perceptive statement that stands at the core of this problem with interpretation. It must be considered in all of the interpretations offered by HWA. Jesus used many secular images throughout this parable to define broad spiritual principle. Why would we adopt the secular details to define church praxis. Jesus used the following secular ideas:
1. Secular royalty and government.
2. Slavery.
3. Secular financial transactions using money.
4. Grassroots rebellion.
5. City management as a source of fame and wealth.
6. Punishment of poor performers.
7. Execution of one’s enemies.
These secular details have nothing to do with the Christ who is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the Cosmos. These are not concepts that should be adopted by the church. Yet, at the broad level, there are spiritual principles that we must attend to. The principal ideas are that it is going to take longer for the Eschaton to develop than people think and there were people with different levels of commitment in Jerusalem who were talking up the Eschaton – some were walking in The Way and others had some knowledge but were not using it in a Godly way (v. 11).
Using parables to establish doctrine should be approached with caution and never developed in isolation from the total body of scripture. Armstrongists recognize this when it is convenient for them. In their support of the Millerite concept of Soul Sleep they are quick to categorize the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man as just literary. For other parables, the interpretation may be literal. This hermeneutic of convenience is not sound.
Personally, I would not aspire to manage five secular cities. I think it would be a challenge and an untenable burden for any one conscientious person. I think Jesus is using cities here as a source of largess as a result of taxation. Likely, a common First Century phenomenon. Lots of cities, lots of tax money flowing to the ruler. Once again, a secular example that, if considered as literature, has a useful spiritual parallel. In the future we may reign with Christ over cities not for our personal advantage but to serve others. The Kingdom of God is about serving others not single-leader, top-down, authoritarian government so we can join the Rich and Famous.
Scout
Lonnie
ReplyDeleteI don't see where your version and HWA'S is necessarily mutually exclusive. The Kingdom will be a literal government having authority, ruling the earth with Jesus Christ as King and it will be the end of human government.
"The Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David. He shall reign forever and of His kingdom there shall be no end", Luke 1:32-33.
Other scriptures testify to this and they are literal, not symbolic (see Daniel 7:22-27, 1 Corinthians 15:24-25, Revelation 2:26-27, 11:15, 20:4).
The difference between the rule of God and man's rule of greed is that the rule of Christ will have an objective:
" when THY judgements are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness--not hate or warfare". (Isaiah 26:9, 2:2-4).
The problem I see with HWA'S version is he leaves out your version, which is also true. Thank you for the effort.
A few soundbites and crickets chirping - We know when we've written something that the Armstrongites can't answer...
ReplyDeleteMaybe they're moving on from the presiding pessimism of this blog...
DeleteOr, you are so far out in left field that it's difficult to find a place to start.
DeleteMatthew 13:10-12 King James Version (KJV)
ReplyDeleteAnd the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
9.38 am, it's feast time, so fewer people are looking at this blog.
ReplyDeleteCan I start up CNN in the Kingdom?
ReplyDeleteMy thanks to Scout and BP8 for their perceptive comments.
ReplyDeleteThe thanks was from me! Still haven't gotten used to this new way of posting comments :-)
ReplyDeleteLonnie, just give us the facts and your line of reasoning, and we'll decide for ourselves whether your and others opinions are "sound bites/something the Armstrongites can't answer" or something profound, or anything in between. We don't need a mental seeing eye dog, together with the inherent gaslighting.
ReplyDeleteI still don't get it when people say they do not want to rule over cities which mean they do not believe what Jesus says in the Bible. The Bible says we can learn from physical things. Thus, who do not want to be promoted to be a CEO of a corporate company if that is his chosen career? Yes, as humans, we make mistakes in doing our job as a senior executive. But, as a spiritual being and being perfect as God is, rest assured we do not display the type of "lording it over" attitude of fallible ministers of the WCG kind. Those ruling over others in the coming Kingdom of God will show kindness, compassion , mercy and judgment just as Jesus Christ did when He was on earth. HWA's version is correct (and this does not mean he is third in line after God, the father and Jesus Christ, the Son).
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 8:48 wrote, "I still don't get it when people say they do not want to rule over cities which mean they do not believe what Jesus says in the Bible."
ReplyDeleteNo, it has nothing to do with not believing what Jesus says. It has to do with personal interests and talents. Someone needs to rule over cities in the Kingdom. (In my previous comment I was referring to secular, this-world city management.) If they are good rulers they will show love and make life easier for everyone. For me, if someone said my reward in the Kingdom was going to be running the waste management system for the Decapolis, I would do it but I would consider the assignment to be outside my area of interest. I would be looking hopefully towards my next rotation.
But that is a secular view. In the next life, I do not believe God is going to fit square pegs into round holes like happens in this world almost interminably. If you move around our society at all, you daily run into people who should clearly be doing something else. Doing nothing would be better than incompetence that adversely affects other people. I think that one of the joys of the Kingdom is that people will be matched with the calling of their heart.
I am happy to admit that I would not make a good waste management engineer. But other people would find their calling in this field. It is a field that is complicated, challenging and requires expertise in civil engineering. And I am happy when someone does a good job. We have a part of the community that I live in where sewers sometimes back up into homes. You get the picture. I love the profession; I just don’t want to do it.
Another aspect is that some people have a warped idea of what reigning with Christ is. They think they are going to be sitting on a throne, surrounded by the obsequious, wearing a sparkling crown, impatiently waving a scepter around and barking out orders all day long. You know, the single-leader, top-down, shaking-jowls, authoritarian government with a royalty overlay that you have heard so much about. We have one great King and that is all we need. I believe the rest of us will be pretty much “hands on”, first-line management.
Scout
One of the deficiencies of mainstream Christianity of HWA's day was that those who taught it were a little bit light on the nature of the ultimate reward. basically, they had us floating around heaven all day, as ghosts, basking in the "Sonlight" of Jesus. HWA gave us more to do. The mainstream also provided a Danteesque vision of the punishment. An illogical and cruel God burning incombustible reprobates in fire that lasted for all eternity. Simple extinguishment of the body and soul did a better and more compassionate job of dealing with those who resisted God's ways.
ReplyDeleteWe see the diversity in God's creation. HWA portrayed a yellow pencil reward. Salvation was to be a one size fits all affair, because even though he had us all active and working in the Kingdom, HWA was not able to expand upon simple examples provided in scripture in a way that would have personalized the reward to each of our specific aptitudes, skill sets, preferences, personalities, outlooks, and further educational and developmental needs. You either got your city or cities, so that you could teach and enforce Armstrongism, or you burned up in the Lake of Fire.
In my recovery years from Armstrongism, I read widely. I realized that from my years in childhood forward, I had been spoon-fed something that was presented as an all-purpose, complete solution, yet was just as incomplete as the mainstream which it was said to be correcting and replacing. It did not even account for the fact that amongst humanity, there are different types of leaders, and styles of leadership, not just some wooden managerial type, a variation of the "collector of people" archtype. Somewhere in my early years of recovery, someone gave me a copy of Jonathan Livingston Seagull. It is most definitely not scripture, but it was thought provoking, and expanded my limited concepts of the possibilities in an afterlife. It made total sense, moreso than anything to which I had been exposed previously. Someone else shared Desiderata.
I also realized at some point that there are certain things about life which are intended to be mysteries. Those who would tell you that they have all the answers cannot satisfactorily provide explanations, thus exposing their own limitations and vulnerabilities as teachers or gurus. The discussion thus far has been about Armstrongism vs mainstream, and has not progressed beyond the binary. Life is not like that. Our choices are not all I-O. There are deep details and underlying factors, shades of grey. The answers we seek must relate to and apply to each of us personally. A great number of them, we won't even have until we die. I remember something my grandmother told me shortly after my grandfather died. She kept it very simple. She said, "He knows."
Anonymous Saturday, October 19, 2024 at 9:18:00 AM PDT,
DeleteYES, a very perceptive and well-articulated analysis. The real world is NOT two dimensional either/or. There is variety, and a lot of room between any two extremes. None of us have all of the answers (although some of us think that we do). Growth and exploration are hardwired into humanity, and I love the reference to Jonathan Livingston Seagull.
BP8 writes:
ReplyDelete“The Kingdom will be a literal government having authority, ruling the earth with Jesus Christ as King and it will be the end of human government.
"The Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David. He shall reign forever and of His kingdom there shall be no end", Luke 1:32-33.
My position is that Jesus Christ will not be literally reigning on the throne of David in the Messianic Age and that there will not be end of human government in this age.
(Those who experience the first resurrection are changed in to spirit and, for all intents and purposes, the spirit realm is now their home - see below).
The opposite position, which is common to many, comes from not appreciating that the Bible is ancient Near Eastern literature, written with the thoughtforms of that time. And that applying modern western logic to ancient near-eastern thoughtforms can result in misunderstandings.
When it comes to Scriptures like Luke 1:32-33 caution is required based on the prevalence of the principle of agency in Biblical times.
The principle of agency put succinctly is that what a man does through agents he may be said to do himself. Cp. "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9).
The meeting of Jesus and the Centurion is a good example of this principle. If one was to read Matthew’s account one would be forgiven in believing that Christ and the Centurion met face to face and spoke one to another. But if you read Luke’s account one will see that it was Jesus and the Centurion’s agents that met face to face and spoke one to another.
Because of the principle of agency Matthew could record that Christ and the Centurion literally met. Luke from the same principle could put the words of the centurion in the mouth of his agents as if he was literally there speaking.
Looking then at these two Scriptures:
Lk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give [didomi] unto him [autos] the throne of his father David:
Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave [didomi] him [autos] to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, (ESV).
it is to be noted that the Greek words “didomi” and “auto” are common to both; and that in Rev 1:1 Christ delegates his angel as his agent to make known the revelation.
This leads into one of my favourite observations, not only is it a comment by a woman, but a gentile woman to boot:
2Ch 9:8 Blessed be the LORD thy God, which delighted in thee to set thee on his throne, to be king for the LORD thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do judgment and justice.
The throne of the Lord was Jesus Christ’s throne as he was the Word of God and it will be Jesus’ throne as the Son of God. Just as Solomon sat on the throne for the Christ as his agent under the Old Testament Kingdom of God so a succession of Davidic kings, descendants of David and relatives of Jesus, will sit on the throne of David ruling for him in the New Covenant.
This will fulfill part of the promise God made through Jeremiah that in the Messianic Age — in those days, at that time — David will not want for a man to sit on the throne of David and the Levitical priests will not fail to have a man to make offerings smoke (Jer 33:14-26).
(BI takes Jer 33:17 out of context and applies it from the time of Zedekiah).
Part 2
ReplyDeleteWhen David captured the stronghold of Zion he was not only a king but was now a priest after the order of Melchizedek (cp. Ps 110:4). Davidic kings, like the original Melchizedek, are both kings and priests. Davidic Melchizedek king-priests are temple builders, temple maintainers and overseas of Temple worship.
[For those who read the NT back into the OT and regard Ps 110:4 as originally a prophecy about Jesus Christ how do you apply Ps 110:7 to Christ: “He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head”?].
Silence in the Bible, is not necessary an omission, but used as a form of emphasis. When the ark was brought to Jerusalem, David was dressed in a linen ephod and “offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD” (2 Sa 6:17). In the account of sacrificing not a priest is mentioned. It is suggest that this was to highlight the order of Melchizedek, not the order of Aaron. (cp. Heb 7:11). That is a priest after the order of Melchizedek is patron of Temple worship and is over the order of Aaron. It was David who organized the priests into courses (cp. also Hezekiah, 2 Ch 31:2); Solomon deposed Abiathar as high priest and put Zadok in his stead; and Hezekiah prayed for pardoning of the unclean who ate the passover - a priest is a person who mediates between God and man. Hezekiah also provide a type for the Millennial prince.
In the Messianic Age a succession of Millennial princes will rule for God. Ezekiel 40-48 highlights more so the priestly role of the Davidic king. From Jeremiah 33 one knows that there will be a succession of David kings ruling in Israel but the Millennial prince is not identified as such. It is suggested that this is to highlight that the true king of Israel dwells in the holy of holies of the Millennial temple (Eze 43:7a), just as He did in Moses’ tabernacle and Solomon’s temple.
Ezekiel reveals that the Millennial prince will have lands either side of the sacred district (45:7 & 48:21); he will have sons (46:16); he will have servants (46:17aa); if he gives land to any his servants it is to be returned in the year of liberty (46:17ab). The prince, and only him, will have the privilege of eating bread in the porch of the outer east gate (Eze 44:3) and has access rights to the inner east gate so that he can view the offering of his sacrifices from the threshold that leads into the inner court; but as his priesthood is not after the order of Aaron/Zadok he cannot step foot into the inner court (Eze 46:12). He will also be responsible, as patron of the cult, for providing the sacrifices for the appointed times (Eze 45:17) including the public passover purification offering on the fourteenth of the first month (Eze 45:22).
After Joseph’s death, Jesus was now both king and priest — a Davidic Melchizedek king-priest.
The picture: a king ‘sits’ to exercise his role and a priest ‘stands’ to exercise his role.
In the prospective part of the retro-prospective insert of Revelation 7, in the chronological storyline of the book, the Lamb and the Saints standing before the Lord picture the priestly role of the heavenly king-priests. Christ throne (Rev 3:21) in the heavenlies, which the Saints will ‘sit’ on, and the thrones of Rev 20:4 picture the kingly role of the Saints.
Part 3
ReplyDeleteEph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in the heavenlies
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus:
The implication of these verse in Ephesians is that in the Messianic Age Christ and the Saints will replace Satan and the Demons in the heavenlies. So that instead of demon rulers there will be saint rulers. And it is suggested that this is the heavenly kingdom Paul looked forward to (2 Ti 4:18).
Zec 14:18 If the EGYPTIAN PEOPLE do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The LORD will bring on them the plague he inflicts on THE NATIONS that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.
Lonnie likes to note that God cannot be contained. For me, to suggest that when Christ appears the second time (Heb 9:28) that will be no more human government is to under estimate the power of the holy spirit. I would suggest that with Satan and the demons restrained, Christ and the saints ruling from the heavenlies and Christ’s spirit poured out on all flesh, human beings will be able to govern themselves in a godly way up to a standard of God’s acceptance, facilitated by Israel fulfilling the role God intended for her (Ex 19:6a). In won’t be a bed of roses as there will still be male and female, left and right, and different cultures - it will be interesting to see how tribal cultures based on honor and shame will fare.
But it all depends on submitting to the rule of Jesus Christ. When mention is made of the “kingdom of God” some modern readers of the Bible think of “kingdom” in the concrete eschatological sense, not being aware that the primary use of the word is in the abstract, or dynamic sense. Robert Young’s translations captures the primary sense in these verse:
Mar 1:14 And after the delivering up of John, Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of the REIGN of God,
Mat 6:33 but seek ye first the REIGN of God and His righteousness, and all these shall be added to you.
Mat 12:28 'But if I, by the Spirit of God, do cast out the demons, then come already unto you did the REIGN of God.
Cp. Mt 11:29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; ... and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
“The central thesis of this book is that the Kingdom of God is the redemptive reign of God dynamically active to establish his rule among men, and that this Kingdom, which will appear as an apocalyptic act at the end of the age, has already come into human history in the person and mission of Jesus to overcome evil, to deliver men from its power, and to bring them into the blessings of God’s reign. The Kingdom of God involves two great moments: fulfilment within history, and consummation at the end of history. It is precisely this background which provides the setting for the parables of the Kingdom” (George Eldon Ladd, The Presence of the Future, Rev. ed., p.218).
Mat 24:14 and this good news of the REIGN shall be proclaimed in all the world, for a testimony to all the nations; and then shall the end arrive. (YLT).
It is suggested that the end-time proclamation of the good news of the kingdom of God, may entail three essential elements: (1) the present kingship/rule and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ; (2) the soon coming heavenly kingdom; (3) and the soon coming earthy "kingdom of the Lord over Israel" and the earth. With (1) being the foundation for both (2) and (3).
Anonymous 9:18 wrote, “HWA portrayed a yellow pencil reward.”
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed what you wrote. But I would like to consider the statement that I have quoted above a little further. First, let me date what I am going to say. The viewpoint I am going to discuss comes out of the Seventies. Over the years, I have never heard a revision of it. But it comes out of classes at AC Pasadena and not from the pulpit.
A buddy of mine, a Pasadena graduate who was working at Big Sandy, told me that he was taught in some class at AC Pasadena taught by some teacher something kind of alarming. Sorry I can’t remember the class and the teacher. And when he told me about, it was alarming to me but not to him. He was a loyal soldato.
The beginning point is the fact that the Tabernacle that Moses was instructed to build was patterned after things in heaven (Heb 8:5). Someone clever concocted an extension of this principle to support the idea that the present WCG was a pattern of God’s future government. The church was the “Kingdom of God in embryo” as HWA used to say. My buddy said that this meant that HWA was going to rank highly in the Kingdom – maybe working with Abraham or some such. And the rest of us would be arrayed in a hierarchy with the ministry of the WCG as our overlords. So, we would be serving under our WCG minister for eternity. Where we were in the church with regard to rank was where we would be in the Kingdom. If you were church trash, you would occupy the lowest rungs of the extensive hierarchy.
I was alarmed at this because when my buddy explained this, I was about as low as you could get in the church. I was persona non grata. At that time, it did make sense, though disappointing sense. This meant that the rewards we were to receive in the next life were already on display in what we were doing and how we were situated in this life. And this also had the effect of endorsing everyone who was ordained. They were ordained for eternity so nobody should dare disagree with them. Also, men would forever rule over their wives. So, there was no mystery about the next life.
The problem is, you can’t find anything to support this in the Bible. It is based on a peculiar exegesis of an isolated scripture. But if you are a well-situated tyrant, it sounds great. Because of this, I would say that HWA, who felt like he knew exactly where he would be sitting in the Kingdom – in one of the best seats, thought that the yellow pencil rewards were for the church trash and not for the leadership and ministry. This is a nuance on what you stated above but a significant one. It is significant because leaders and ministers in Armstrongist denominations may still believe this. Like I mentioned, I have seen no renunciations.
Scout
Scout, I never heard that theory specifically enunciated during the time I was an AC student, during your friend's same era, but there were certainly many church members who acted as if they believed it were true. Years later, and on some of these same forums and blogs in which we've both participated, I did read some quotations from Dave Pack, and they very closely resembled what you shared. What strikes me is that one of God's roles, perhaps the greatest one, is the development of His human resources. "Once a peon always a peon" would place severe limitations on God's ability to work with His children. That's how we can know that the theory is man-made and most likely a product of some big mouthed elitist's vanity!
DeleteI believe that being made in God's image means that we each resemble God in special ways. As an example, I am perfectly happy with my own perhaps small resemblance to God. One primary function He performs is maintaining His entire creation, ie keeping it all running. I am a technician and keep incredible machinery running and in good repair in numerous cities in the state in which I live. Business owners depend upon these machines to produce products, and those who operate them earn wages which feed and clothe their families. I'm happy with my work, and have built decades long relationships in a broad cross section of industry and office environments, with the presence of the machinery having been my entrance point into these relationships.
I'm using this as an example not because I believe that my particular gifts make me special, but because most likely everyone who reads and contributes here has their own talents, talents which HWA would have them forsake, and suppress in favor of ruling cities, and this as their mandatory "reward". Jesus said what he said. However, I believe that He was imparting a general principle, one from which all who heard could extrapolate, and personalize encouraging principles, figuring out how those principles apply in their own lives, circumstances, and dreams. In my case, one might say that I kind of rule one aspect of the cities in which our equipment is located, at least that's the way I'd extrapolate from Jesus' words. Personally, I am very deeply satisfied with the power my gift with machinery has given me, and the ways in which I've seen it touch the lives of others. That's the real. Isn't it nice to be no longer troubled by HWA's literalist visions of the Kingdom as being a place in which we are forced into his own conceptual renderings?
I have heard Roy Holiday years ago preach this theory, watered down for the 'church trash' during Tabernacles. He remarked how in the Kingdom we shall look up into the sky and see Herbert and Loma shooting across the sky hurriedly doing God's work.
DeleteI actually have. And an even uglier version if you were black.
DeleteMost of my ministers were Pharisees, which means they see the world in terms of their own needs rather than the world as it is. So it's to be expected that they secretly believe their delusions of being the bosses of Christ's 144,000.
ReplyDeleteThe truth is that most won't even be in the kingdom. Perhaps their special place is being at the front of the queue for the lake of fire.
I recommend:
ReplyDeletehttps://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2024/10/once-and-future-kingdom-part-i.html
https://asbereansdid.blogspot.com/2024/10/once-and-future-kingdom-part-ii.html
I looked at part-ii where you commented writing: "...If Adam and eve ate from it, they would be in terrible trouble. They were already alienated from God for certain, but if they ate from that other tree, irredeemably so...
Delete...Yet, they succeeded in this, the most important mission: the Savior did arrive. The world owes Israel a debt of gratitude.
...and then they killed Him.
To be entirely frank, we all killed Him, in our own way...."
******
But, Adam and Eve did eat from that Tree of Life! How do you think they lived so long, and whatever that tree's fruit provided must have passed on to subsequent generations. What was Methusaleh's age? 969, but over time that powerful fruit's impact wore off. Why? After Adam and Eve no one was allowed access to that Tree of Life, which had nothing to do with God's Spirit, as HWA believed. That's okay; he didn't know, and neither did we.
Also, the world does not owe Israel any debt of gratitude, because what God is doing (Acts 15:18) is all part of His perfect Plan of Salvation to save all humans (John 3:16-17 is absolutely true), and subsequently destroy Satan and his angels, which were made to be destroyed (2 Peter 2:12; Matthew 25:41, 46, etc.). If debt is owed, it is owed to The God (not Jesus Christ), that God of Abraham Laughter and Israel (Acts 3:13), who created Israel from a miracle through Abraham and Sarah, who were beyond the possibility to have children. It's a Plan, a perfect Plan (Isa 14:24, 26; Heb 4:3)!
And to say: "...To be entirely frank, we all killed Him, in our own way..." is to blame/judge human beings, something Paul refused to do (Romans 7:17, 20).
I was not alive in Jesus' time on earth some 2,000 years ago. I did not kill Jesus Christ, but He was murdered by Satan (John 8:44) a murdered and cause of sin in our lives, as Paul strived to tell us. How so?
"He that committeth sin is of the devil;..." I John 3:8
E.g. who murdered Abel?
"Not as Cain, [who] was of that wicked one, and slew his brother..."
Cain with his very good human nature (Genesis 1:31) would never, on his own, hurt (Eph 6:12) his brother.
Satan worked through Cain, and those who killed Jesus Christ, by his spirit (James 4:5 (yes, in Christians too); 2 Tim 2:26; Luke 9:55; Isaiah 9:14; Hosea 4:12; I Cor 2:8; I John 4:6). This entire world is leavened with Satan's spirit but, thankfully, it isn't forever (Isaiah 27:1; Ezekiel 28:19)!
Lonnie, will you along with the likes of a Douglas Winnail (seeking some Jesus to "very soon" return to reign on earth for 1,000 years, and rule with joint-heirs Pack, Weston, Franks, Kubik, Shabi, Weinland, Flurry, etc.), be ruling over 10 cities?
Time will tell...
John
133-3 parts
ReplyDeleteI am aware of the technical details which underline certain scriptures such as Luke 1:32-33. I was merely quoting it as is.
As far as the "end" of human government in this age, I was referring to the godless carnal type that exists now in this world system. You know the type, where the " love of money" and "who is the greatest" determine every decision made, and nothing gets done for the people. That will cease in the messianic Kingdom.
Anonymous 5:27
ReplyDeleteWell "spoken".
One of the paradoxes of Armstrongism has to do with how HWA and other leaders valued human beings in comparison to how Jesus valued human beings. I was sitting in the Field House in Big Sandy on a Sabbath afternoon listening to HWA give a sermon back in the Seventies. He was all spun up about some ministers who recently left the church in Louisiana and became window washers. And he made the clear and forceful statement that “It is a shame for an AC graduate to work with his hands.” I saw the shock come to the faces of some of the men sitting in my vicinity in the audience. Apparently, HWA did not realize that Jesus was a carpenter or he had no respect for that fact. Perhaps, he felt like someone who hawked laundry detergent was more valuable than a skilled carpenter.
So, we have the paradox of a church that consisted principally of high school graduates who did Blue-Collar work being led by HWA. In a Midwestern WCG congregation of about 350 that I attended at one time, there were perhaps four or five college students – maybe a similar number of college graduates. We students were studying at a “World” college and to some were an object of amusement. Yet, HWA quite openly disparaged Blue-Collar work. I don’t think many people in the “local areas” understood his perspective on this. He looked down on the lay membership of the WCG and I heard him criticize them repeatedly.
While this seems like a scarcely credible state of affairs, we find the same thing repeated in the relationship that Trump has with his MAGA base. A self-exalting leader riding on the shoulders of the little people that he disparages. And though it is dismaying, our reality has become more like the WCG than less.
Scout
Like your comments generally, but I think you miss badly on Trump. The laborers at his construction sites have generally liked him, and he them. Kamala is truly condescending and rude to her “lessers”.
Delete
ReplyDeleteLonnie asks: "...Is it possible that the story is pointing to the gifts of the Holy Spirit being distributed to them? Is it possible that the story is suggesting that those servants should be about the business of growing in grace and knowledge - developing the fruits of that Spirit which were entrusted to them? Is it possible that the story is suggesting that those individuals who have grown the most in love, kindness, and mercy will be the greatest in the Kingdom? Indeed, wouldn't such an interpretation be more consistent with our understanding of the definition of a parable? What do you think?..."
******
I think this parable, like the parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30, is not about humans qualifying for future rulership, but is about principalities (e.g. Matt 4:8-9; Matt 23:33-35; Eph 6:12; 2 Tim 2:26; James 4:5) ruling, like some curse (Zech 5:3) upon earth, which will eventually end (Rev 22:3).
3 servants are involved. 2 servants double their talents, and the 3rd one gains nothing.
2/3 of the created angels do good; 1/3 of the angels do evil.
Currently, it is the evil angels ruling earth: just witness the evils all about us, but their rulership isn't forever. Sure the good angels will be busy with those of God's Church, b/c Satan and his demons would destroy them is allowed and there would never be 144,000 sealed Firstfruits, making up a Bride and God would be a liar. The good ones will be involved in rulership worldwide in the future, but will happen to the evil ones?
Matthew 25:30 “And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
IOW, what is left of the 1/3 evil angels will be with Satan in that bottomless pit, and they will exit that bottomless pit 1,000 years to mess up the MMM (Mickey Mouse Millennium of Doug Winnail and other former WCG hirelings of scattered xcogs). After a short/little time/season, God will kill them.
Who is left to continue rulership worldwide? Them good angels.
The parable of the pounds is about 10 servants, a very similar parable to the talents, with the same results:
Luke 19:27 “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”
Humans keep wrestling flesh and blood, knowing virtually nothing about the control by the principalities, and life goes on.
Think about man and angel: flesh and spirit, as in Genesis 19 (Lot vs. men or angels); Exodus 15:3 (Is the LORD man or spirit?); Daniel 9:21 (Is Gabriel a man or an angel?); Revelation 21:17, etc.
So, is the parable of the pounds about men striving to get/qualify for rulership positions for SELF, or is it about angels?
Time will tell...
John
HWA could be so superficial regarding certain things. When he saw a guy with some wrenches, and screw drivers, he'd assume that all that guy needed to know was which way to turn nuts, bolts, and screws to tighten them, and which way to turn them to loosen them. Basic grunt muscle memory.
ReplyDeleteHe had no idea about diagnostic skills, or the level of knowledge and experience which one would need to complete repairs in such areas as mechanics, electronics, hydraulics, pneumatics, and for the past thirty years, computer software and controls. To him, the ability to convincingly teach so-called restored truths was the ultimate, and nothing else mattered.
Well, my machine repairs never broke up peoples' families, ruined their finances, or made them die for lack of proper medical care!
Were those who had been born as females supposed to get cities? Or were they too part of HWA's permanent underclass for all eternity?
ReplyDeletePermanent underclass? God is no respecter of persons. It's all about what everyone does with what they're given.
DeleteIntensities in ten cities? Attrocious Theodocius already thunk that one up. Used it as the title for his "live" album.
ReplyDelete