The Legacy of Arianism, Part 2 Armstrongism and the Subordination of Jesus

 

Jesus, Perhaps

(Fair Use, A Mizrahi Jew)

The Legacy of Arianism, Part 2

Armstrongism and the Subordination of Jesus

By Scout

In another sense he (God) is “being itself,” in that he is the inexhaustible source of all reality, the absolute upon which the contingent is always utterly dependent …All the great theistic traditions agree. 

- David Bentley Hart, from “The Experience of God”

 

There are two principal moments of error that render Arianism untenable.  First, Arianism denies that the Holy Spirit is a person.  Second, Arianism denies the Deity of Jesus Christ – a belief known as Subordinationism.   Both moments of error have influenced Armstrongism.  I addressed the first issue earlier and in this writing, I will address the second issue. 

Arius of Alexandria not only denied that the Holy Spirit was a God Person, he also relegated Jesus to a subordinate position in relationship to God the Father.  This was not just a diminishing in role of the incarnate Jesus but a diminishing in the ontology of the Logos.  Arius had strange ideas but then again he was an ascetic and probably wasn’t getting enough to eat (for the incurably literalist, that was meant to be tongue-in-cheek).  The relegation was of a radical sort.  Arius believed that Jesus was a finite being created by God, perhaps, a kind of great angel.

In modern times, we find Arianism within the Millerite Movement.  The Adventists were originally Semi-Arian.  And Robert Coulter, former President of the Church of God Seventh Day (CG7), stated in a 2008 interview, “When I grew up in the church, it was Arian. It taught the preexistence of Christ, but Christ was not God. I remember the first time I read the phrase "God the Son" and it made me mad.”  Coulter also said, “Arianism tends to degrade the position of Christ …” – an understatement that is the theme of this essay. 

Why the Armstrongist Belief in Subordinationism Doesn’t Work

When I was in the pre-1995 WCG, I was aware of the fact that Jesus did not get anywhere near top billing.  God the Father, Moses, The Law, prophecy, even the Feast of Tabernacles, all eclipsed Jesus and the Gospel he brought.  In Christian churches, Jesus is very prominent.  The message of salvation is very prominent. I have seldom ever heard Christians talk about Moses and The Law of Moses.  The focus was always on New Testament behavioral standards.  

Somewhere in history, Armstrongism departed from the Arianism of the Church of God Seventh Day to become Semi-Arian.  I have not tried to establish who was involved or when. Armstrongism did not wholly abandon Arian Subordinationism but asserted a form of Subordinationism that was different from the CG7 doctrine.  Armstrongists believe that Jesus is God, unlike the early CG7.  But Armstrongists also believe Jesus is a secondary God, Deuteros Theos.  And there is a fatal flaw in the logic of this reasoning. 

God is absolute.  God is absolute because, quoting Hart above, “he is the inexhaustible source of all reality.”  God brings all that he wills into existence.  And his will is not limited. “…With God all things are possible.”  This means he is absolute and not relative.  He is not just greater than other beings on some measurable scale.  The scale does not apply to him.  This is because he can create reality.  And here is the rub for Armstrongism.

Absoluteness is like Infinity.  There is no Infinity that is greater than another infinity.  Infinity is not relative.  One infinite number set is not bigger than another infinite number set.  The integers are not greater than the real numbers.  If two beings are absolute, one cannot be ontologically greater than the other.  They may assume different roles but in existential essence, they are co-equal.  

When Armstrongists adopted the belief that Jesus is God based on the first few verses of the Gospel of John, they admitted that Jesus is absolute.  The verses in John support this because they show Jesus to be the great Creator – and being Creator is the source of absoluteness.  One is unlimited because one can create reality.  So, Jesus cannot be less than God the Father in existential essence.  Jesus can certainly be less than God the Father in assigned role.  On the other hand, two finite beings can be of different capabilities.  Although it is a different subject, I believe the Armstrongist form of Subordinationism logically renders God the Father and Jesus to be two finite beings, one greater than the other. 

For some, this will seem like philosophy unmoored from scripture and, hence, will not have credibility.  Let me counteract that view.  Later in the Gospel of John, which starts with a declaration of the absoluteness of Jesus based on the fact that he is the operational Creator, there is a statement in chapter twenty made by Doubting Thomas.  In John 20:28, Thomas refers to Jesus as “o theos”.  This phrase is the word God, “theos”, preceded by the article “the” which is “o” or ‘ho” in Greek. This designation is reserved by ancient writers, both Biblical and Secular, for The God or the great God.  Thomas’ statement places Jesus in the same class as God the Father by using the articular form “o theos” of him.  Some theorize that this might just be an exclamation or an honorific.  But my viewpoint is that the designation bears such weight that Jesus would not let it simply pass if it were not true.  Jesus did not correct Thomas. Jesus let the statement stand. And it stands to this day.  This is the only direct statement of Christ’s Deity in the New Testament. 

Armstrongists are right in recognizing that Jesus is God but wrong in believing that he is subordinate to God the Father in essence. 

Kenosis

But why do Armstrongists believe that Jesus is subordinate to God the Father?  This seems to stem entirely from a statement Jesus made in John 14:28, “I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.”  This is a direct contradiction of Doubting Thomas’ statement in John 20:28. So, how can Jesus be both co-equal with God and at the same time lesser than God?  When Jesus became incarnate, he emptied himself of many of his Godly attributes or capabilities, if we can call them that.  Paul wrote in Philippians 2: “Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who, though he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, assuming human likeness. And being found in appearance as a human, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death - even death on a cross.”  (The word “equality” in this verse apparently does not prove ontological equivalence between the Father and Jesus but is a legal term that asserts equality in rights or privileges. See note in David Bentley Hart, “New Testament”.)

It is obvious that when Jesus reduced himself to mortality in a process called Kenosis, he became lesser than the Father.  Jesus suddenly acquired the potential to die – am infirmity that has never pertained to the Father.  And this is the source of the “greater than I” statement.  The Father and Son are co-equal in existential essence but differ in economy or personal vocation and it is the co-equality in existential essence that is asserted by the Trinity.  Arianism and Armstrongism do not acknowledge the co-equality between God the Father and God the Son in existential essence.

The Upshot

The legacy of Arianism has had an impact on both Armstrongist theology and praxis.  Given this legacy, there is nothing surprising about Armstrongism.  It is exactly what you would expect a modern church that had been influenced by Arianism to be like.  You would expect such a church to see Jesus in a diminished role.  Such a church would, therefore, not have a strong doctrine of grace.  Hand-in-glove with a diminished doctrine of grace, it would have a strong pre-occupation with works as a factor in salvation.  Because of the de-emphasis of Jesus, such a church would not see love as an important means of forming relationships.  And the church’s doctrine of God might posit a limited God, a relative rather than absolute God, that fits the Arianist model of finite god Beings.   Although HWA often spoke of how God raised him up to restore the truth after eighteen and a half centuries, his truth seems actually to be the natural offspring of Nineteenth Century Arianist Millerite theology. 

 

Note:  The photo at the top is of a Mizrahi Jew – a Jew native to the Middle East. Jesus would have resembled this kind of Jew not an Ashkenazi or a Sephardi.  Both of those groups are a substantial part southern European.  And, of course, all the pictures you find of Jesus in the West depict him as a Northwest European.   I thought I would strike a note for authenticity. 

 

 

 

 

 

Dave Pack: Abib 1 Is Immutable Settled Church Doctrine

 

Why does God always seem to talk to the crazy people?

 

"Grace But's..." in the Church of God

 

I wasn’t addicted to crack; I was addicted to religion in a vain attempt to get God to like me, bless me, or at least spare me from hell when it was all over. It’s funny how one can talk a good grace game, but for all practical purposes live by the law. I’ve learned that the ‘grace but…’ mentality is as lethal as anything you can sniff, toke, or shoot up. If it’s grace, there are no conditions and no exceptions. Anything else is only masquerading as grace. Don’t take it – it will kill you. – 

Jim Palmer, Divine Nobodies: Shedding Religion to Find God (And the Unlikely People Who Help You).

You want to mess up the minds of your children? Here’s how-guaranteed! Rear them in a legalistic, tight context of external religion, where performance is more important than reality. Fake your faith. Sneak around and pretend your spirituality. Train your children to do the same. Embrace a long list of do’s and don’ts publicly, but hypocritically practice them privately …yet never own up to the fact that that it’s hypocrisy. Act one way but live another. And you can count on it emotional and spiritual damage will occur. Charles Swindoll 

 

Grace comes to us in 2 dimensions, vertical and horizontal. Vertical grace centers on our relationship with God. It is amazing. It frees us from the demands and condemnation of the Mosaic Law. It announces hope to the sinner – the gift of eternal life, along with all its benefits. Horizontal grace centers on our human relationships. It is charming. It frees us from the tyranny of pleasing people and adjusting our lives to the demands and expectations of human opinion. It gives relief–the enjoyment of freedom along with all its benefits. It silences needless guilt and removes self-imposed shame. 

 

Legalism is an attitude, a mentality based on pride. It is an obsessive conformity to an artificial standard for the purpose of exalting oneself. A legalist assumes the place of authority and pushes it to unwarranted extremes. 

 

Legalism: the manufacturing and manipulation of rules for the purpose of illegitimate control. Perhaps the most damaging of all the perversions of God’s will and Christ’s work, legalism clings to law at the expense of grace, to the letter in place of the Spirit. – Daniel Taylor

Quotes from “The Grace Awakening” by Charles Swindoll

 

"The Passover Plot" James Tabor and Greg Doudna

There is a fascinating article up on James Tabor's blog about the author of the Passover Plot and its ties to Herbert Armstrong and Greg Doudna.  

James Tabor is a former Church of God member who is a prolific writer of numerous books on the Bible, church history, archeology and modern interpretations of biblical ideas and events. He runs an internationally recognized blog site here: TaborBlog.

Greg Doudna is the author of this fascinating book,

"Showdown at Big Sandy: 

Youthful Creativity Confronts Bureaucratic Inertia 

at an Unconventional Bible College in East Texas"

Tabor says:

On a personal note, Hugh Schonfield died in 1988. I never met him but it was my privilege to carry on a lovely correspondence with him by post during my graduate school days at the University of Chicago in the early 1970s. He was one of the most gracious individuals I have ever had the pleasure of knowing and I was quite taken, and still am, with his ideas expressed in The Politics of God, one of his last works, which has now been republished. I also highly recommend Owen Power’s wonderful dissertation on Hugh Schonfield, now published as a lovely book, Hugh Schonfield: A Case Study of Complex Jewish Identities. My friend Greg Doudna traveled to the UK and interviewed Schonfield in his London flat in 1985. His notes on that extended conversation, which he has given me permission to publish are fascinating. Schonfield’s work is now being carried on via the Schonfield World Trust Service which seeks to promote his vision of a “Messianic Servant Nation,” an idea he developed from the inspiration of studying the historical figure of Jesus.

Tabor includes the interview by Greg Doudna of Schonfield in his article. Doudna says this:

I have always appreciated former members and members who have their understanding or beliefs challenged. Learning new ways of understanding and not being afraid of those viewpoints is mind-expanding and leads to deeper, richer understanding. It doesn't mean you have to agree with things, but you will now have an understanding of different viewpoints. Armstrongism left everything bound up tightly in booklets, never allowing for fresh ideas, questions, or rejection.

The entire article can be found here: 

Hugh Schonfield and the Passover Plot–A Retrospective

 

Fighting Spiritual Warfare with Cox

 

The Apostle Paul said that the Christian's war was against spiritual sources in high places. Successful prosecution of war requires good intelligence about enemy strengths, weaknesses, and tactics. This Facebook channel is purposed to provide that intelligence from careful respect for the Word of God.

Armstrongism just loves a catchy phrase, as they think it will draw people to them. Usually, it has the words "church of god" added to it, but not this time. We are fighting demons now, people!  We must be BOLD! DIRECT and POWERFUL! Though, if it is fighting COX at the helm leading them into battle, history says to be very careful in situations like this.

Sadly, I doubt very much that this battle will include how Cox and other COG leaders have been committing spiritual warfare against Church of God members for decades.

Check it out here: Demonic Spiritual Warfare Tactics

Wade Cox: Abib 2028 Is The Start Of Fictitious Millennium

Is Wade Cox canoodling with Dave Pack? Both of these blithering idiots claim that in Abib, the millennium will be established. It's like the movie Dumb and Dumber, but we get to experience it in real life. Why are today's COG leaders such imbecilic fools?

In the not too distant future NATO will mishandle the situation with the Islamists and they will be forced into the wars of the Fifth and Sixth Trumpet. They will be forced to occupy the Middle East from the military conflict and Russia and China through their intransigence and manipulation of the Security Council. They will occupy Jerusalem with their administration from the Mediterranean Coast to Jerusalem. The False Prophet and the Antichrist will take up residence and as soon as they do God will send Elijah and Enoch to Jerusalem.

 

In that period of 1260 days Judah will be brought to repentance and then the Witnesses will be killed by this demonic beast system. Then the Messiah will come 3.5 days after they are killed and their bodies lie in the streets of Jerusalem.

 

In this period from the wars in the Middle East from 2013 to the return of the Messiah and afterwards to 2024, the entire world will be brought to repentance. Islam is still unrepentant following a false calendar and destroying the teachings of the Koran and ignoring the Laws of God as given to the patriarchs and to Moses and the elders of Israel. They distort the faith with the lies of the Hadith and the traditions of pagans. They mutilate their women and treat them like dogs. They revel in ignorance and brutality. They kill innocent men, women and children. Their violence is unabated and they are unrepentant and false sworn at the end of this 40 years allocated to them to repent.

 

God is about to bring the final wars of the end upon them and He will bring them to the Messiah and to repentance with fire and sword and with diseases and pestilence. The Middle East will not rest now until Shiloh comes and then only after their repentance and inclusion in the plan of God. Firstly, Elijah and Enoch will come to them and restore the Laws of God among them and the calendar and the proper system of worship, or they will die. Everyone that bothers themselves with Jerusalem will die. Gaza and Lebanon and Syria will face war and occupation and the NATO powers will come against Russia and China. Then they will return to Jerusalem and occupy Gaza and Jerusalem and Lebanon and Syria for 42 months. Only Jordan will escape out of their hands. They will control all of Egypt and also from Libya to the Atlantic and from Suez to the mountains of Ethiopia and to Somalia. They will have destroyed all of the powers of the Middle East to Russia prior to that period. Then they will face the Messiah. Their religious systems will be thrown down and their governments and administrations will also be destroyed and they will be brought to repentance. Then the whole world will send their representatives to Jerusalem each year at Atonement and they will celebrate Tabernacles and be instructed in their obligations of the coming year from year to year (Zech. 14:16-19). If they do not keep the Laws of God and His sacred calendar they will die (cf. also Isa. 66:23). 

 

The wars will now escalate over the period 2013-2024. In 2025 God has promised the treble harvest of the sixth year of the Seventh Cycle prior to the Jubilee of the Seventh Sabbath at Atonement on to the Atonement of the Jubilee year in 2027. In 2027 from the Last Great Day in the Seventh Month all lands will be allocated according to the plan of God for the 1000 years of the Millennium which will begin its first sacred year from the New Moon of Abib 2028. That is Scripture and Scripture cannot be broken (Jn. 10:34-36).

Dave Pack: Former Ministers Are All Antichrists

 

Gift Giving

 

Dave Pack: Sell All Or Be Sawn In Two From The Crotch Up

 

AI COG: Dropping the Baton - Blind Splinters Sprinting Solo: The Race That Lost Its Way

Dropping the Baton

Blind Splinters Sprinting Solo: The Race That Lost Its Way

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::

By Ai-COG · Launched a month ago

::Armstrongism investigated:: takes a Deep Dive into the cultic murky world of the Worldwide Church of God and its offshoots. If you love investigating cults stick around and prepare to dive deep!