The brothers Elohim are hard at work
Ah, theology—the grand arena where ancient texts meet modern interpretations, often resulting in ideas that make you go, "Wait, what?" If you've ever wondered what happens when you blend a dash of ancient Hebrew linguistics with a hefty dose of speculative cosmology (and perhaps a stiff breeze for dramatic effect), Cox's teachings provide a masterclass. At the heart of his doctrine is the eyebrow-raising notion that both Jesus Christ and Satan (once known as Lucifer) were part of the "elohim"—a council of divine beings created by the one true God, Eloah. It's like imagining heaven as a cosmic boardroom where Jesus and Satan were once colleagues, until one got fired for insubordination. But is this biblically sound, or just another theological plot twist gone delightfully awry? Let's dive in-depth, with a sprinkle of sarcasm for flavor, because sometimes you need a laugh to handle the heresy.
Cox's writings, scattered across CCG's website and various papers, paint a picture of a universe teeming with spiritual bureaucracy. Papers like "The Elect as Elohim" and "Wars of the End: Preparing the Elohim" outline a plan where God's ultimate goal is to expand this elohim family. It's ambitious, sure, but it sets the stage for his most controversial claim: that Jesus and Satan were both charter members of this elite club. Oh, and did I mention Satan was the "Morning Star" assigned to Earth as its guardian? Because nothing says "trustworthy overseer" like the guy who ends up leading a rebellion.
Enter Jesus: In CCG lore, he's the firstborn elohim, the Logos or Word from John 1:1, who acted as Eloah's chief architect in creation. Colossians 1:15 ("firstborn of all creation") is twisted to mean he's created, not eternal. And Job 38:7's "morning stars" singing at creation? That's Jesus as one star, shining bright in the divine choir.
Now, the twist: Satan gets the same VIP treatment. Originally Lucifer, the "Light Bringer," he was another morning star—Earth's planetary manager, no less. Isaiah 14:12 and Ezekiel 28:14-16 paint him as a perfect cherub who fell due to pride, trying to grab equality with God (unlike humble Jesus, who didn't). In Cox's view, Satan was "Satan-el," an elohim of a planetary quadrant, part of the same created order as Jesus. They were like divine brothers—one stayed loyal, the other went rogue, leading to a cosmic HR nightmare. This resolves Genesis 1:26's "let us make man in our image" as the elohim council chatting, not some Trinitarian mystery. Clever, right? Or, as critics might say, a bit too convenient, like retrofitting the Bible to fit a sci-fi novel.
Cox assures us this restores “true pre-Nicene Christianity” before those pesky pagan Trinitarians ruined everything. Bonus perk: faithful humans get to join the elohim country club someday. Who wouldn’t want eternal godhood with dental? The only tiny problem? Equating the eternal Son of God with a created rebel angel tends to make actual biblical scholars develop facial tics.
- Jesus gets demoted to a created middle manager. Arianism called; it wants its heresy back. John 1:1–3: the Word “was God,” not “was a god,” and “without him nothing was made that has been made.” If Jesus is created, who created him? Crickets. Hebrews 1:8–10 straight-up calls the Son “God” and credits him with laying Earth’s foundations. Angels worship him (Heb 1:6). Cox turns the Creator into a promoted creature. Bold. Wrong. Catastrophically wrong.
- Satan gets a massive, unearned promotion. The Bible calls him a fallen angel, created servant (Heb 1:14), a liar, and a murderer from the beginning. Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 are prophetic smack-talk against human tyrants, not Satan’s LinkedIn profile. Job’s morning stars? Poetic angels at creation, not evidence of Jesus and Satan sharing a bunk bed in eternity past. Making Satan a peer of Christ is the theological version of saying Darth Vader and Luke were equals before the family drama. No.
- Yes, the word is plural. It’s also frequently a majestic plural for the one God, like royalty saying “we.” Psalm 82 is God judging corrupt authorities (human or angelic), not unveiling a pantheon. Jesus quotes it in John 10 to defend his unique divinity, not to say “I’m just one of the guys.” Cox’s henotheism-lite crashes head-first into Isaiah 43:10: “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” God isn’t franchising.
Wade writes:
The LCG and the other offshoots conveniently ignore key texts of the Bible that show clearly that the angels are all sons of God and that Satan is also a son of God. Job 1:6 and 2:1 show that they all had access to the throne of God including Satan and had such access at the time of Job who was a son of Issachar resident in the Middle East (probably in Midian). These sons of God were the elohim who were the angelic host and are recognised as such by the Biblical scholars such as Bullinger and others. The sons of God were termed elohim which is a plural word recognising God as an extended being. Elohim is referred to in Job 2:1 but the name Eloah is used many times to refer to the One True God throughout Job. Job 1:6 refers to Satan being among the sons of God. He is used then to tempt Job and afflict him. Job 2:1 also has the same scenario when the sons of God came before God and Satan was again among them. It is thus beyond dispute that there were many sons of God in OT times and Satan was among them and they all had access to the throne. These sons of God were divided into ranks and positions and we see from Job 38:4-7 that the One True God created the earth in the beginning and that the sons of God came together before God at the creation and all the Morning Stars sang for joy when they were shown the creation. Now a Morning Star is a planetary ruler and is referred to as a light bearer or “Lucifer” and these heads of the Heavenly Host were the rulers of the Heavenly Council which we were shown at Sinai being founded in the Tabernacle as the Sanhedrin of the Seventy plus Two, and who are divided into the Heavenly Council in Revelation chapters 4 and 5 of the Four Cherubim and the Twenty-four elders and the Lamb of God. The outer council was the other forty-two elders making up the 72. This was the Sanhedrin also from Sinai and the Seventy-two or Hebdomekonta [Duo] ordained by Christ as the elders of the church (Lk. 10:1,17).
Now many sons of God were sent to mankind as messengers and that word was Malak in Hebrew and the word in Greek was Aggellos. The word simply meant messenger and the elohim were all sons of God as elohim until they were sent to mankind as a malak. That is the reason why they were all referred to as Yahovah and the human host prostrated before them (Gr. proskuneo). That same word is used of the elect when those who say they are Jews and are not but lie proskuneo before the elect of the Philadelphian Church in Revelation 3. The Binitarian worshippers of the god Attis in Rome brought their heretical doctrines in to Christianity from 175 CE. To introduce the Binitarianism of Attis they had to elevate Christ to a level above the other sons of God or elohim. They did this by creating a class and called them “Angels” from the word aggellos or messenger which was the translation of the word malak or messenger in the OT. They then made them distinct from Christ and used the term elohim or theos of he and the Father only. Having done this fabrication they then introduced the Holy Spirit as the third element of a Triune God by 381 CE at the Council of Constantinople and confirmed it from Chalcedon in 451.
15 comments:
wade (walk with effort in water) cox (coxswain) is an anomaly.
Yeah, to humanity. Check his military records if you can still find them online. But for the Armstrong movement? Fellow Kook-aaboo! Equal to Sam, or Bob, the two Geralds, Ron, Dave, the committees governing UCG and COGwa, Jon Brisby, Bob Thiel. They're all the same, although each upon reading this will despise being listed with the other birds of the same feather. They can see the kookiness of the others, just not in themselves when they look in the mirror!
Hah Hah Hah! Boogah Boogah! Welcome to the jungle!
The only real reason Cox is a Christian is because he was born in a Christian country and brainwashed all his life. That is how religion works.
is twisted to mean he's created, not eternal. And Job 38:7Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)'s "morning stars" singing at creation? That's Jesus as one star, shining bright in the divine choi
seems just like the teachings of the Jehovah Witnesses, except they demote Jesus to a mere Arch Angel - Michael I recall. They insist there be just one Arch angel though so I suppose that is meant to mean something.
As the notion that Adam and Eve were the first and only humans is and always has been total and idiotic nonsense since a person understands that their children did not mate with each other. Then there is no proof in the bible that there are not many Gods......The bible only tells the story of ONE of them. I liken that to the movie Highlander where a couple of immortals fight until "There is only ONE."
Anyway.....The Archangel Michael's name means.......Who is like God.....both a statement and a question.
I find it most interesting that most of the Germanic Tribes and most Military men of the Early Middle Ages liked Arianism better than the Nicene creed.....I guess it is because they were simple uneducated people (like HWA) therefore a creed akin to Arianism is far more logical than the construction theologians agreed upon after the Emperor forced them to agree in order to have one ideology for all in his Empire. And I read quite a few threatening letters by the Emperor and the Eastern Church begging Rome their equal to give their blessing since they were the "Elder brother" with the authority to seal the new agreed upon creed......
nck
As with the other ACOGs, Wade focuses on academic religious fluff that has no bearing on everyday living. So by default, the toxic church culture
remains intact and unchallenged.
Cox is not a Christian. He is one in name only. Talk about someone brainwashed!!!!! He has taken Armstrong's teachings and expanded them even further to include the unholy filth of Islam as part and parcel to Christianity is a moron and a cult leader.
I have a few questions on the so-called teachers (i.e. the herbies) and so-called training specifically related to ambassador colleges.
I understand that Spanky was one of the first to graduated from ambassador college. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Did Pack and Flury graduate from any (I asume Pasadena)? I understand Flurry was a so-called minister in the wcg. Not sure about Pack. What about this guy Cox?
I do not hink that Bob Thiel did, correct?
What about the UCG and COGWA people? Are they ambassador grads or did they come into the belief at some point?
Also, there were three different campuses. Pasadena was the big one. Big Sandy was the other one with the third in England.
The wiki article spends time trying to show that the Pasadena location and none of the others bothered to get regional accreditation, although it was authorized by the state (not an accreditation org) to give degrees, despite spending years trying to get accredidation in CA. The wiki indicates they just wanted to be like bible colleges.
That article indicates that Big Sandy got an accreditation in 1994, although they were all shut down in or by the end of 1996. Is that correct?
Did England Bricket Wood get an accreditation?
Pack graduated. To my knowledge, Flurry was an elder from Missouri who was brought in to AC for a year of classes, and then sent back out. Both of those guys were at AC in Pasadena. I had never heard of Wade Cox until he managed to get some of the blogs and forums critical of Armstrongism temporarily shut down because they presented official documention on his lapse in judgment as an officer during military training exercises in Australia decades ago,
The governing bodies and ministry at UCG and COGwa are populated primarily with pre-Tkach AC grads. Members left the WCG to follow those ministers into UCG, and members of COGwa left UCG to follow the ministers who decided to split from UCG. I'm sure both orgs have ordained local ministers who are not AC grads over the years.
"Spanky" Meredith, (he got that nickname for continuing to spank his daughter even when she was well into her teens) was indeed one of the early proteges of HWA, an early AC grad. He stuck the WCG for the tab for his slander against Leona McNair, and then founded Global Church of God, didn't like the governance there, so left it to found Living Church of God. Bob Thiel was not an AC grad, but ingratiated himself to Meredith as his apologist and defender through his COGwriter website, which was resented by most of the LCG members. Bob was never ordained and eventually left LCG to become a prophet. Most of the ministers in LCG are AC grads.
I was long gone by then, but I understand that AC became Ambassador University under Joe Tkach Sr., and did receive accreditation of some kind. I'd waited for years for this to happen so that a real college or university would accept my two years worth of AC credits, and I could go back to school for a couple years to get my B.A., but by the time it all came through, I was already well advanced in my career, degree requirements for my position with a major company had been waived, and I no longer needed anything from AC. Sure would have helped in the lean years preceding that, but no biggie. I had survived.
By the way, HWA had decided that the accreditation committee wanted too many changes to his program, and he had ceased in his efforts to seek it. Accreditation would have presented an unwanted layer of authority over him, one that his personality and ego would not permit.
I hope I answered all your questions. That's all I know about the whole abominable mess!
6:42...
The very last thing HWA wanted for AC was it to be a bible, minister or religious college. Neither did he want any government/darwinistic interference with its curriculum.
It was to be the Worlds first International College headed from Switzerland aimed to teach students languages and culture. It evolved in a broader liberal arts college. Only in its last few years accreditation was sought financially apart from the Church.
HWA initially sought councel with recognized educators to start this relgious renaissance type internationally minded college. Japanese and Malayan kids if dignitaries had their first international american empire experience there. Prince Charles was interested in its global international outlook as patron of the World Colleges that came much later.
The settings were a reflection of the Amwrican Founders ideal that pphysical environment shapes the character of the student. But I am nit sure if any rugged American kid understood that principle as they already ruled the World through the American dollar Empire.
People here might pile 10000% percent negativity about their experience there. But I only say what its aim was not wgat it turned out to be. And I would refer to alumni websites where people reminisce their experiences as youngsters as they moved on to real life from ideal...
Nck
Dave Pack was a young ministerial assistant in the Indianapolis area back in the early 70's. After exhausting his 4-5 memorized sermonettes he moved on, to where I don't remember. Now he's down to giving one sermon: Christ is coming . . .next week!!
Nck, the original vision of AC as an international college which you outlined, was that HWA's intent in the 1930s? I know that he held many views and beliefs back then which morphed and changed as he became more deeply immersed in his life's work in the late '40s and early '50s when the college was actually founded. His original concept of church government was nowhere near as controlling or cultic as it became in the mid 1950s either.
Ambassador College was indeed very Henry Higginsish when I attended in the late 1960s. Nationally, those were revolutionary times. I had enjoyed suburban youth culture as it existed in the early '60s but soured on it as it gave birth to the hippie movement. Honestly, the only thing I enjoyed about the hippies was their awesome music. In a sense, AC was a haven against hippie youth culture. We students pretty much remained in the early '60s culturally. At that point, we all firmly believed HWA's original time table of 1972-75. The draft and Vietnam loomed large on the horizon. It was difficult to view that war as defending our country. In fact, the group think in the church and college of that era was that the USA and Brittain were soon to go down anyway, and that it was futile to attempt to thwart the downfall because it was "of God, not man" a fulfillment of prophecy. There was an entirely different attitude within the church community in those days, and I'm not sure that the people who didn't actually live it really understand the bleakness of those times.
Nationally, there was a huge and sudden paradigm shift when Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980. And of course, WCG had already gone through its own reality check in 1975. I had gotten a clue and was gone by that point in time and only knew what I read in the newspapers. Imagine my surprise, after hearing the ministers rail against the hippies having their sit ins, and occupying college and governmental buildings, and then reading in the newspaper about the massive sit in and protest at the AC Hall of Admnistration when the government came a calling on the church. It all seemed so hypocritical!
It's been interesting. Because of prophecy, I never believed I'd live physical life beyond age 27. My life plans were all based on that belief. But, I did give that all a chance, and only left when it became obvious that HWA really didn't have a clue. He was just another kook, just as ridiculous as those seeking his mantle today.
BB
Yes BB.
The perceived government structure was entirely different in 1940 as compared to 1970.
The AC concept I described was the 1947 concept... as co devised with HWAs brother in law educator Dillon.
True about early 1960 time capsule. WCG was countercounterculture timecapsule for a generation that did not go with counterculture.
Its hard for me to conceive anyone bought into a 1975 timeliine since the huge buildng program devised in 1963 was openly published since 1967....
I remember the bleakness and Nixon leaving the gold standard. Oil crises et all. Archie Bunker.
Yet there was the Coca Cola: "Let us teach the world to sing"
and then there was another 19 year time cycle giving room for the advent of Reagan. Former Governor of the 7th Economic Power in the World..... The wonderful State of California.
The World Tomorrow Program rising to 2nd Religous Broadcast just behind Bob Schuller.... Dennis Diehls Dutch Reformed Preacher.
It seems although HWA was an Internationalist who would totally oppose MAGA movement as a cult..... has for 100% shaped the Religion that people like Pete Hegseth adhere to.... only now as the American Empire is fading away in its last stage as it has shed any notion of soft power that HWA was an extension of.
Nck
The brethren wondered out loud about the building program in the face of 1975, nck, and frequently! And, lest anyone assume I'm talking about the fringers who always questioned and second guessed, no! Even the people known for their "proper attitude" were wondering. It was a logical question. HWA shut them down, forcefully stating that when the end came and it was time to flee, he wanted Jesus Christ to see him "so doing" right up to the end, like the profitable servant. Besides, HWA in many ways, saw himself in the light of King David. He wanted to build a "house for God" and he was determined to do so. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the auditorium was the last building on the master plan.
BB
Yes I understand. Pray as if it is all over tomorrow and work like the World might last generations....
The exact Cold War mindset I remember.
True about the Master Plan....
although the Church was building in more places... Australia HQ, Office redecorations late '70's, schools Sri Lanka early eighties, and huge projects under Tkach but by then the end was not near anymore... Always building like Quakers should....
Nck
Post a Comment