In May 1986, months after Herbert W. Armstrong’s death, the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) published "Passing the Baton" in The Good News Magazine. The article announced Joseph W. Tkach as Armstrong’s divinely chosen successor, framing the transition as a relay race with biblical roots—Moses to Joshua, Elijah to Elisha, Christ to Peter. It promised continuity for "the Work" of proclaiming God’s Kingdom (Matthew 24:14
). Yet, when Tkach later led the WCG into mainstream Christianity, shedding Armstrong’s doctrines, splinter groups like the United Church of God, Philadelphia Church of God, and Church of God, The Eternal broke away, claiming to preserve the "true faith." In rejecting Tkach, they didn’t just challenge his leadership—they dropped the baton. The Bible offers no precedent for rival temples or priesthoods when the appointed strays, raising a stark question: if Armstrong was God’s servant, why defy his authority?
The Baton Passed—and Rejected
"Passing the Baton" portrays Armstrong as a modern Moses, guiding his flock toward spiritual victory. Tkach, his Joshua, was handpicked under divine guidance: "God led Mr. Armstrong to see leadership qualities in Mr. Tkach," echoing Moses’ selection of Joshua (Deuteronomy 31:14). The article vows acceleration: "Once the baton is received… there is a speeding up." Tkach committed to Armstrong’s revelations, tasked with advancing the race.
But Tkach’s path diverged. By the 1990s, he jettisoned Sabbath-keeping, British Israelism, and non-Trinitarianism for evangelical norms. To many, this was apostasy, a betrayal of the Philadelphia era (Revelation 3:7-13). Splinter groups formed, each asserting itself as the "true remnant." They branded Tkach a fallen runner, but did their exodus align with the biblical pattern they championed?
No Precedent for Rival Temples
Scripture, the Armstrongists’ claimed foundation, shows God working through appointed leaders—flawed or not—without endorsing rival factions. When Israel’s priests corrupted the Temple, Jeremiah didn’t build another; he demanded reform (Jeremiah 7:1-11). The northern kingdom’s rival altars at Bethel were denounced as idolatry (1 Kings 12:28-33), with God’s covenant tied to Jerusalem’s Temple, faults included. Elijah, paralleled to Armstrong in the article, didn’t start a new Israel—he confronted the apostate one (1 Kings 18). Joshua built on Moses’ legacy, not against it (Joshua 24:31). Peter’s imperfections didn’t spark rival apostles; Christ upheld him (Matthew 16:18). The pattern is reform, not schism.
The splinter groups might argue Tkach’s shifts nullified his authority, but "Passing the Baton" insists God chose him, as He did Armstrong’s biblical forerunners. Rejecting Tkach required biblical justification for starting anew. None exists.
Church of God, The Eternal: A Case in Point
Consider Church of God, The Eternal, founded by Raymond Cole in 1975 after resisting WCG doctrinal changes, now led by Jon Brisby. This group holds Herbert W. Armstrong as "God’s end-time servant," uniquely chosen to restore truth. Yet, if Armstrong was divinely appointed, his selection of Tkach—announced with confidence in 1986—carries that same authority. Cole and Brisby’s refusal to submit to Tkach, even amid perceived apostasy, contradicts their own logic. Moses didn’t abandon Israel when it strayed; he led it back. Elijah didn’t forsake his post. If Armstrong’s baton-passing was God-ordained, splitting off defies the very succession they revere. Their stance implies Armstrong’s authority was conditional—yet Scripture shows God’s chosen endure, not abandon, wayward flocks.
The Cost of Dropping the Baton
The splinter churches’ rejection of Tkach fractured Armstrongism. "Passing the Baton" envisioned a unified Work racing forward. Instead, groups like the United Church of God (tens of thousands), Philadelphia Church of God (thousands), and Church of God, The Eternal (hundreds) cling to dwindling remnants, bickering over the "true" baton. The WCG, now Grace Communion International, thrives in mainstream circles—suggesting the race persisted where succession held. The splintering mirrors Israel’s post-Solomon split: rival altars weakened, not saved, the mission. By dividing the baton, they stalled the Work they swore to advance.
A Call to Action: Follow or Forsake
If Armstrong was God’s end-time servant, as these groups profess, his authority—including his choice of Tkach—demands obedience, per biblical precedent. Leaders and members of the splinter churches must put their money where their mouth is: submit to the succession Armstrong established, despite Tkach’s changes, as Joshua did with Moses’ legacy. Reform from within, as Scripture models, not split. If they can’t, they must admit they’re crafting their own religion, co-opting Armstrong’s name without his mantle. Clinging to a fabricated Armstrongism—neither honoring his authority nor abandoning his shadow—is a half-measure. Either follow the baton fully or forsake it entirely and start anew. Anything less mocks the race they claim to run.
Conclusion
"Passing the Baton" was a plea to trust God’s hand in leadership transitions, rooted in biblical examples. When Tkach redirected the WCG, the splinter groups didn’t just reject him—they dropped the baton, defying the succession they laud Armstrong for establishing. Scripture offers no model for rival temples when the appointed falters, only a call to endure and restore. Church of God, The Eternal and others face a reckoning: if Armstrong was God’s servant, his baton demands loyalty—or they must confess they’ve abandoned his race for their own. The Work lies divided, its runners scattered, the finish line farther than ever.
Dropping the Baton © 2025 by Ai-COG is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0
Support ::Armstrongism investigated::
8 comments:
I thought the baton only covered the seven NT church "eras."
There was NO HWA baton, only a club to bash you for your money.
Herbert and Tkach cancelled all those who tried to think for themselves. Cancel culture is the disease of our age, but is not a new phenomenon.
You don't remember all the "baton" motifs around Tkach's succession? It was a thing for a while in the church publications.
Back when Herbie left COG7, they didn't call it "pulling a Tkach". It was more like "pulling an Armstrong" And, of course the baton model remaims appropriate, except that these always were heretical churches, and God was never involved. Oh, and there is no such thing as "Church Eras", although many more folks attended the church of their choice regularly during the Depression Era.
BB
Hang your brain up with your coat! Some still try it on, its called "Collective thinking" and 'individual thinking is frowned upon.
HWA rebelling against the COG7 was rebelling against "church government" was it not??
Rebelling against church government? If COG7 even had it in the first place, what Herb did was more akin to identity theft!
Post a Comment