[Those that follow what] Armstrong taught have joined the PCG. We are continuing to change and must change deeply. New truth is consistently revealed to us. What does it means when we say Christ is in us? It should mean the same thing that Christ meant when speaking of His Father. "Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, He doeth the works" (John 14:10). Jesus Christ was completely under His Father's authority.When we personally claim that Christ is in us, we are saying that we have unconditionally surrendered to Jesus Christ are His government. It means that He rules us totally. Having Christ rule our lives is the only way we can truly grow and make the necessary spiritual changes. We must know that our spiritual growth is not meant just for this time. Our spiritual changes now are leading to the ultimate change---from that of mortal man to becoming God---a son of God! This will be a universe-shaking change.By Gerald Flurry
Nothing quite captures the spirit of the New Covenant like this quote from Gerald Flurry declaring that those who still follow Herbert W. Armstrong have found the one true home in the Philadelphia Church of God. In it, Flurry explains what it really means when we say “Christ is in us.” Spoiler: it apparently has very little to do with the actual New Covenant and everything to do with total surrender to the church’s government and, eventually, becoming God yourself. Because why settle for being saved when you can aim for cosmic promotion?
According to Flurry, the PCG is where the real action is because “new truth is consistently revealed to us.” How convenient. The Bible, apparently, was just the first edition. The real updates come through the current leader. It’s almost as if God realized He forgot a few crucial details back in the first century and has been drip-feeding them to a small group in Oklahoma ever since. Under the actual New Covenant, the revelation is finished. Jesus is the final Word (Hebrews 1:1-2). The faith was “once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). The Holy Spirit illuminates what’s already written — He doesn’t run a monthly newsletter with bonus doctrines. But sure, let’s pretend the canon is open and the latest patch notes come from the leader’s desk. That’s definitely how the New Testament describes the church.
Flurry quotes Jesus: “Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?” (John 14:10) and then says this should mean the exact same thing when we claim Christ is in us.
Let that sink in for a moment.
Jesus was speaking about the eternal, ontological unity within the Trinity — the Father and Son sharing the same divine nature and works. Flurry takes that staggering statement and applies it to ordinary believers so he can conclude that having Christ in you means you’ve “unconditionally surrendered to Jesus Christ and His government.”
It’s a theological sleight of hand worthy of a magician who also sells used cars. The Trinity is not a template for church hierarchy. Jesus and the Father are one in essence. You and Christ are united by the Spirit through faith. One of those relationships involves two members of the Godhead. The other involves a forgiven sinner. Pretending they’re the same thing is not deep theology — it’s convenient for anyone who wants absolute authority dressed up as “Christ ruling through His government.”
Flurry continues: having Christ in you means He rules you totally through His government. In the New Covenant, Christ does indeed rule His people. But He does it directly, through the Spirit, and through the Word. Believers have direct access to God (Hebrews 4:16). There is one Mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). The New Testament never describes the Christian life as “submit to the organization and its leader, who speaks for Christ.”That model feels suspiciously like the Old Covenant with better branding. The New Covenant was supposed to write the law on hearts and give everyone direct knowledge of God (Jeremiah 31:33-34). Instead, we’re told the real meaning of Christ dwelling in us is total submission to an ecclesiastical chain of command. How very… efficient for maintaining control.
And then comes the mic-drop: all this spiritual change is leading to “the ultimate change — from that of mortal man to becoming God — a son of God! This will be a universe-shaking change.”There it is. The crown jewel of Armstrongist theology.
You don’t just get forgiven. You don’t just get adopted. You don’t just get glorified. No, no — you get to level up into actual deity. Move over, Trinity. There’s a new God Family in town, and apparently the application process involves tithing, keeping the holy days, and recognizing the current leader as God’s man on earth.
The New Testament does say believers will be “like Him” (1 John 3:2) and will reign with Christ. It never says we will become God. We remain creatures. We will be glorified humans, not additional members of the Godhead. The Creator-creature distinction doesn’t get retired at the resurrection. But why let minor details like monotheism get in the way of a really inspiring sales pitch?
Here’s what the New Covenant actually offers, according to the documents that were written before the “new truth” updates arrived:
- Forgiveness of sins through Christ’s finished work.
- The indwelling Holy Spirit who transforms us from the inside.
- Adoption as children of God — real, legal, relational sonship.
- Future glorification and eternal life with God.
- Direct access to the Father through the Son.
Gerald Flurry’s version is certainly more exciting if you enjoy the idea of climbing the cosmic corporate ladder. It just has the unfortunate problem of not being what the New Testament actually teaches.
The New Covenant was never meant to turn forgiven sinners into gods. It was meant to turn rebels into children who finally know their Father. Anything beyond that is just made up cultish nonsense.
1 comment:
When Flurry eventually departs this world, his organisation will almost certainly contract in the same way Armstrong’s system did. Looking back, it is remarkable that the “becoming God” doctrine was ever believed at all.
One could fairly describe it as a heresy in the New Testament sense. Armstrong’s doctrine of humans becoming God‑beings is one of the clearest examples of such a departure is a direct contradiction of Paul’s teaching on the nature of God, the nature of salvation, and the nature of humanity. Armstrong did not merely teach that believers would be glorified; he taught they would literally become God, a doctrine found nowhere in Scripture and one of the clearest signs that his theology was a man‑made construction rather than the gospel Paul preached. In the process, he effectively turned Paul into an adversary rather than an ally, reshaping Paul’s writings to fit his own system. And we became complicit.
Post a Comment