A Thoughtful Review of Samuel Martin’s July 2026 Newsletter on Corporal Punishment and Christian Communities

Samuel Martin’s recent newsletter from the New Foundation for Biblical Research is less a simple advocacy piece and more a strategic brief: a clear-eyed attempt to equip human-rights and children’s-rights practitioners with the cultural and theological literacy needed to engage the very people most resistant to abandoning corporal punishment of children. Drawing on personal experience inside a high-control fundamentalist environment, Martin argues that purely scientific or secular arguments routinely fail with devout Christians because they never touch the deeper systems of authority, belonging, and biblical interpretation that sustain the practice. The letter is patient, respectful, and practically oriented. It is also, for anyone familiar with Armstrongism, immediately recognizable.

Martin opens by naming the gulf between the two communities. One side works from empirical data on child development and harm; the other works from faith, Scripture, and submission to spiritual authority. He refuses the easy contempt that sometimes appears on the activist side (“God-botherers,” “Bible-bashers,” “Baptist Taliban”). Instead he insists that influence requires understanding the internal logic of the people one hopes to persuade. Christians who spank are not generally sadists; many genuinely believe they are obeying God, protecting their children’s souls, and remaining faithful to their church. Asking them to stop spanking can feel, to them, like asking them to abandon God. That is the first and largest barrier.

He then maps the interlocking controls that make change so difficult. Pastors and church leaders claim spiritual authority (Hebrews 13:17) and expect submission. Members are told not to forsake assembling together. Financial support is framed as obedience or even as refraining from “robbing God” (Malachi 3:8). Marriage and child-rearing fall under the same umbrella of divine instruction mediated by the church. In environments that present themselves as the true Church of God, dissent is not merely disagreement; it is rebellion against God Himself. Martin notes that the denomination of his childhood featured a “Pastor General” who exercised near-absolute control—language and structure that will ring familiar to anyone who lived through the Worldwide Church of God under Herbert W. Armstrong.

Within that framework, corporal punishment is presented not as one parenting tool among others but as a biblical mandate. Hebrews 12:6–11 is read as teaching that true chastening is “grievous,” not joyous. The “rod” passages are treated as straightforward commands. Positive or gentle parenting approaches are often dismissed as worldly, soft, or even anti-biblical. Martin quotes a pastor who insisted that spanking must continue “until the child’s will is broken” and until the tears are of submission rather than anger. He also cites the historical Puritan tradition that framed children as stubborn and rebellious and the parental task as conquest. These teachings do not merely permit hitting; they sacralize it.

The practical consequence, Martin observes, is that many parents continue the practice even when their own experience suggests it is counterproductive. One mother he quotes had been told by her pastor that she would be sinning if she stopped spanking—even if the civil law changed. That is the depth of the control. Scientific studies or secular children’s-rights arguments are easily dismissed as the product of “godless scientists.” The only way through, Martin insists, is to meet people inside their own authoritative texts and show that the traditional reading is shallow or mistaken.

Here the letter turns constructive. Martin points to his own 2002 book, Thy Rod and Thy Staff, They Comfort Me, which he still offers free of charge. The book is deliberately exhaustive—hundreds of biblical texts, scholarly commentaries, and Jewish interpretive perspectives that many Christians never encounter. By removing the financial barrier and by arguing from Scripture rather than against it, the work has, by his account, helped thousands of parents abandon corporal punishment while remaining within their faith. The strategy is not to demand that people leave Christianity; it is to demonstrate that the Bible itself does not require the violence they have been taught is mandatory.

The letter’s greatest strength is its sociological honesty. Martin does not romanticize the communities he describes, nor does he pathologize ordinary believers. He simply describes the mechanisms of control—time, money, marriage, child-rearing, and the fear of falling outside the true Church—and explains why external pressure so often hardens resistance. For anyone who has watched Armstrongist groups enforce “godly” child-rearing standards, the analysis lands with particular force. The same hierarchical language, the same use of Malachi 3 and Hebrews 13, the same framing of dissent as spiritual danger, and the same sacralization of physical discipline were standard fare in the Worldwide Church of God and remain so in many of its splinters. Martin’s father, Ernest L. Martin, was himself a prominent WCG theologian who eventually left; the son’s perspective is therefore both insider and critical.

There are limits. The letter is written from within a Christian frame and is most persuasive to those already committed to biblical authority. Readers who reject the authority of Scripture altogether will find the internal critique less compelling. Martin also focuses primarily on the American and English-speaking fundamentalist landscape; the dynamics in other cultural contexts may differ. And while he is careful to treat people with dignity, the very intensity of the control systems he describes can leave outsiders wondering how much genuine freedom of conscience remains inside some of these groups.

Nevertheless, the newsletter succeeds on its own terms. It is a clear-eyed map of the terrain that children’s-rights advocates must navigate if they hope to reach the parents who most need new tools. It refuses both contempt and naïveté. And it models the very approach it recommends: engage the sacred texts seriously, remove unnecessary barriers, and offer an alternative reading that allows people to keep their faith while abandoning a practice that harms children.

For those of us who once lived inside systems that treated “breaking the will” as a spiritual duty, Martin’s letter is both familiar and clarifying. It explains why the teaching was so hard to question at the time, and it points toward a more careful, textually grounded way of reading the same Bible that was once used to justify the rod. That is a useful contribution—measured, experienced, and still urgently relevant.

Silent Pilgrim

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Human Rights and Children’s Rights Practitioners Need to Understand This about Christians if They are ever Going to Get Anywhere with Convincing Them To Abandon Corporal Punishment of Children

A Newsletter from the New Foundation for Biblical Research

July 2026

In my first book, in the introduction, I mentioned that I wanted my book to be a bridge between the Christian community and the Human Rights/Children’s Rights communities.

These two groups are so far apart in how they relate to each other. One works on the basis of science and the other works on the basis of faith.

I remember one activist who I knew who referred to Christians who believed in corporal punishment as “God botherers.” This activist had such a frustrating experience with these people that they were just considered a “bother”, which if you live in Commonwealth countries, you will know that this means these people are a big problem and are very frustrating to deal with. In the UK, they are also called “Bible Bashers” (my sister who lived in England for many years used to use this term often when we talked). We have also heard of the terms “Fundies”, “Holy Rollers”, “Bible Thumpers” and in some countries “Clappers” or “Wowsers.”

It is important though that we all remember that all people must be treated with respect and dignity, even those we disagree with. What is important is that these dear people may hold views that we disagree with, we still need to look at things from their point of view if we hope to understand them and possibly influence them to think something different especially when we are talking about something which has a very huge influence on society like the corporal punishment of children.

There is also a pretty dark side to some of this. One of my friends had a blog, which is still online titled “The Baptist Taliban.” Many people have a basic understanding of who the Taliban are. They are an Islamic fundamentalist group who now are the leaders in Afghanistan, known for their rigid fundamentalist teachings, which many looking at characterize as brutal. What my friend’s blog chronicles are her experiences with various churches who operate as Christians, but their tactics practically resemble the behavior of the Taliban. In other words, they behave like a type of Christian extremists. Yet, many of these Christians do not consider themselves extremists at all. On the contrary, they consider what they are doing to be correct, true and reflecting the Bible and its teachings. In fact, anyone who is not doing what they are doing is considered to be out of step with God and in some cases anti-Christian. Some Christian groups go even farther and characterize anyone who does something different than what they are doing as being in “Babylon” or not being close to the true God and His teachings.

It is important to understand in countries like the USA, where according to some estimates, the number of different Christian denominations in existence exceeds 33,000, you are going to find a very wide variety of Christian behaviors and a very diverse way of looking at and interpreting the Bible. These churches are all different and differ from each other in one or a hundred ways, but almost all of them have the same holy book: The Holy Bible.
Honestly, many academics and people working in the children’s rights community have seemingly few real practical strategies to engage with Christians who believe in corporal punishment. The only problem is, though, that these Christians are the most ardent supporters of corporal punishment of children so if you are working to stop that behavior among all people, it seems you must have an approach of how to engage this target group. This is especially so important because there are so many fundamentalist Christians living all over the world and they all respect and use the Bible in their daily lives. This is very important because all children deserve to grow up in peace and this includes children whose families are Christians including the most fundamentalist sects of Christianity.

In addition, in an environment where financial resources are finite, does it not make the most sense to try to influence those who are strongest supporters of the practice of corporal punishment?

For people who engage the issue of corporal punishment of children with the view to having an open mind to change often means that they are not going to give up their faith. They would rather keep spanking their children and stay within their faith community than to give up spanking and abandon their religious beliefs.

So, scientific oriented advocates for children need to be willing to meet Christians where they are because overall they are not going to abandon their faith.

The Barriers To Changing Christian Minds About Corporal Punishment of Children

Many barriers exist within Christian society that encourage them to continue using corporal punishment on their children. To break down these barriers, one must approach the matter from inside the faith community. Attempting to engage them using science is generally not going produce good results. In fact, many religious leaders point to scientific arguments against spanking children as false teachings put forward by godless scientists who do not know the first thing about God and His Word.

The first barrier that anyone working with Christians is going to have to realize and accept is the simple fact that Christians have people in their faith communities who have taken on positions of leadership and authority in and over the lives of believers. These are pastors or other church leaders, and these individuals often place themselves in a type of spiritual authority over people who are members of their congregations.

Whether this is right or wrong is irrelevant. This is the reality and anyone seeking to engage this community needs to take this matter into consideration. This does not happen for no reason.

Let us review a Bible text which can help anyone from outside this community understand better how it works. It is found in the book of Hebrews, chapter 13:17 quoting here the King James Version:

“Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.”

We can see in this passage, depending on how would interpret what it says, it says that pastors and church leaders have authority over those in their congregations and that those individuals are to “submit” themselves to this leadership. People watching “souls” are in fairly important positions.

This is not a minor issue. Some religious leaders exhibit a level of control over the members of their churches which can be almost absolute. The church that I grew up in was very much like this. The head of the denomination referred to himself as the “Pastor General” using a military kind of term and rest assured he ruled with absolute control of what was taking place in the entire church.

This control in some fundamentalist religious groups also extends from pastors to their wives, who then exhibit control over other women in their churches. See my earlier reference to the Baptist Taliban blog which discusses this at length. Pastors and their wives can behave exactly like dictators. This is particularly troubling in some churches who operate on a decentralized local autonomy model of church government. Local churches can make whatever rules they want and have absolute power to do that. This is particularly difficult where the higher ups in a denomination may take a position which is consider less conservative and straying away from the truth which local bodies then take it as their mission to follow the more correct path.
Look at this example from some who read my book and left this testimony concerning the issue of corporal punishment of children and the attitude that she experienced from her pastor, who told her that even if the law concerning spanking children was changed, she should ignore that law and continue to spank her child. This is the power that some religious leaders wield over their church members, even urging them to break the law. Note her direct testimony:
“"Hi, I stumbled upon the blog, Dulce de Leche, and Samuel Martin’s blog was mentioned as well as the offer of a book about the Scriptures and spanking – Thy Rod and Thy Staff, They Comfort Me.

I have been struggling with the whole spanking issue. I grew up being spanked, which did not harm me, as far as I can tell, but I also do not know that it benefitted me, seeing as my parents only punished doing wrong and failed to teach how to do right.

Now, with my own children (two 2-year olds) I see that when I spank them (because I was taught that’s what good parents do), it seems to exasperate them rather than discourage them from doing wrong. Though I have been very intentional in trying to teach them what they should do instead, the spanking seems to make them behave worse. When I stopped spanking them a few weeks ago, I saw major improvement in their behavior and attitudes, as well as in my own attitude.

A few years ago, I was told by my (former) pastor that even if spanking were made illegal, Christian parents should still spank their children because they are commanded to do it in Scripture (the “spare the rod, spoil the child verse”, which is, even to me clearly, not a command). He basically told us (my husband and I) that we would be sinning if we did not spank our children.

All this to say, spanking has not been sitting right with me, but I want to follow the Scriptures, whatever that may be. I believe God led me to this site at this time for a reason. I was looking for information on a completely different topic when I came upon this, but this is perfect timing considering where I am at in my parenting journey.”

https://samuelmartin.blogspot.com/.../twenty-two... - THIRD

It is also important to remember that in some countries like the USA, there is a separation of church and state and freedom of religion is guaranteed by the US Constitution. In addition, Americans have freedom of speech and are generally allowed to speak their minds on all issues. What this means is that religious leaders can say things like this and their speech is protected and their views are allowed and allowed in a sense of little or no government regulation due to the prevailing law of the land.

This is not a minor issue as I said earlier. Many religious leaders in many countries, but especially the USA point to this issue of corporal punishment and any opposition to it as evidence of interference of government or other entities in the freedom of Christians to practice their own religion. It is because of this (among other issues) that in the USA, the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) remains unratified to this day and the right of parents to administer corporal punishment is one of the key reasons in America why this UN convention still remains unratified while 196 other countries have ratified it. The USA remains the lone holdout and this concerns issues of parental rights (of which corporal punishment of children is a key one) and national sovereignty.

The second barrier is connected to the first. It involves that fact that Christians are normally told that they should be a part of a community and that they should attend church services where they will hear the message of God from the one designated by God to give them such teachings, who are the church leaders or pastors. Let us review a passage from the Bible which teaches this. What is important is that it is irrelevant what the meaning might be and to whom the passage is directed. If a pastor reads this passage in church, it can be used to teach that Christians need to go to church and that avoiding doing so could be interpreted as wrong and a sin.

“Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.”

So, Christians are told by religious leaders that they have to listen to their leaders and they need to attend church. So, they are told what to do and where to do it. They are also told how to do things.

The third barrier concerns the fact that individual Christians are required to support this system they are a part of in a financial way. This is often through a mechanism where Christians are told that they have to give 10% of their income to the church and this teaching has ramifications to it that religious leaders often accuse Christians who do not practice this procedure called tithing as stealing from God.

Look at Malachi 3:8 from the King James Version of the Bible:

“Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.”

Imagine going to church and being told that if you do not contribute at least 10% of your income to their church (often including additional “offerings”) in addition to tithes [the 10%], that you are a thief and guilty of stealing from God. This is the exact church environment I grew up in and is mirrored around the globe among many fundamentalist Christian churches. Many pastors use these texts in a very dogmatic ways and they can be used to pressure people into giving money to churches accusing them of stealing from God. That is a very uncomfortable place to be in for most people being told you are a thief and the one you are stealing from is God Himself.

The fourth barrier concerns the issue of marriage. Many Christian denominations have certain rules around marriage and these teachings exhibit great control over the lives of individual believers.

The final barrier that we are going to address in this newsletter concerns corporal punishment of children. This is a teaching that is introduced by religious leaders with the design that parents are being instructed by religious leaders to follow the teachings of God about this matter. Anyone who does not use this practice on their children can be considered as being sinful or is someone often way out of step with the congregation who are being taught it religiously.

Numerous Bible texts are introduced to Christians that supposedly support this teaching.

We could go into other areas, but suffice it to say that it is fairly easy to see a system that controls your time, where you go and when, how you spend your money, who you marry and how you raise your children is one which exhibits major control over the lives of those taking part in it. You can also see how attempting to challenge this system for anyone who is a member can be very difficult.

If you are in an environment like this especially where the denomination that you are a part of considers itself the true church of God (like the one I grew up in), if you are not doing what you are told, you find yourself out of step with God Himself. That is a very uncomfortable place for most people to live and exist. So, many Christians go along with these teachings often against their own inner beliefs or intuitions. They also are told that any information contrary to church teachings is wrong and should be avoided.

This is the reality that anyone from outside of a Christian community must understand if they are going to engage with that community. Not taking this reality into consideration is going to leave the person seeking to engage the community concerning an issue about violence against children at a dis-advantage in trying to change the community or especially in trying to influence it in favor of non-violence.

Now that we have seen the overall situation and the circumstances in which Christians are living and operating, it is also essential for anyone trying to understand this community and influence it that when it comes to the matter of corporal punishment and correcting children, many Christians do not generally believe or are not taught about things like positive parenting, gentle parenting or positive discipline. In fact, these ideas are completely contrary to what many Christians are taught when it comes to rearing children. This may be hard to believe, but it an absolute fact.

Punishment, especially corporal punishment, does not have a gentle or a positive element to it at all. It is meant to hurt, to be painful and to be a negative experience. This is what we find exactly in the Bible and this is what Christians are often taught is the exact teaching of God. Note it here:

“For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.

If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?

For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.

Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.” (Hebrews 12:6-11 King James Version)

We can see in the very last verse of this passage the teaching which is passed on to Christians that “chastening” is not “joyous” (not positive), but “grievous” (painful and negative).

This is what Christians are taught and they are taught to hit their children because of this and other passages.

Discipline is not positive. It is negative, it hurts and it is meant to be painful or else it does not follow God’s rules. This is the plain and simple reality that many Christians live with and what they are taught by religious leaders. It is a pretty difficult picture that we are looking at concerning spanking.

I have the following quote about this matter in my book:

“For example, one pastor in his book on child rearing points out that: “The smacking (or spanking) should be administered firmly. It should be painful and it should last until the child’s will is broken. It should last until the child is crying, not tears of anger but tears of a broken will.” – my book can be downloaded free from www.biblechild.com – pg.99

Professor Tamar Morag discusses this in her excellent article: RELIGIOUS TRADITION AND THE CORPORAL PUNISHMENT OF CHILDREN:A COMPARISON OF THE AMERICAN AND ISRAELI LEGAL SYSTEMS - International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 25(3), (2011), 338–364 - doi:10.1093/lawfam/ebr018 - Advance Access Publication 22 September 2011

“Beginning with the English Puritans, Protestant groups played a role in developing a broad spectrum of parental guidebooks. As both Greven and Ellison point out, this literature stresses the parental duty to impose rigorous discipline, and the parents’ unquestionable responsibility for the salvation of their children’s souls. Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards, considered one of the greatest 18th-century American theologian, said about parental discipline: ‘And let children obey their parents and yield to their instructions and submit to their orders as they would inherit a blessing and not a curse’.42 Greven analyses in his study how these religious approaches come to the fore in the language used in parental guidebooks and in Puritan theological writings describing the nature of children and the aims of education. He notes, for instance, the recurrent use of words such as ‘stubborn’ and ‘rebellious’ to describe children’s nature, and words such as ‘conquer’, ‘subdue’, ‘obedience’, and ‘repress’ to describe the parental role.43 A 1732 letter by Susanna Wesley to her son John offers an instance of this type of writing: ‘When a child is corrected it must be conquered, and this will be no hard matter to do’.” (pg.347)

Overcoming these barriers

This situation that many seeking to influence Christians who believe in administering corporal punishment to children is not an easy one. Thankfully, though, it is not an insurmountable one. Many Christians can be taught things that will allow them to overcome the barriers to personal change that they have learned throughout their lives and in their church communities.

To do this, you must come at this situation from their point of view.

The first thing that one must do is to show Christians that they have misunderstood this teaching. This is where books like the one I wrote (as well as others) have come along and had a strong influence to change Christians views about corporal punishment of children.

This was possible because I presented a strong academic case which when evaluated compared to the information that they were receiving from their religious leaders, they lost trust in their own religious leaders and embraced the ideas that I put forward in my book. (or others in some other books).

This is one of the reasons that I gave away my book for free. That in itself seeks to overcome a barrier, the financial one to secure a book, that I wanted to eliminate to help hesitant Christians who have been told over and over again that their pastors and church leaders are right and anyone who teaches something else should be ignored and definitely not read or ever studied.

My book presented a very comprehensive case. I really tried to put forward a “leave no stone unturned” approach. That is why I referenced 353 separate Bible texts, used so many different commentaries and opinions from learned scholars and also included Hebraic/Jewish perspectives that presented different points of view surrounding the Bible texts that Christians may not have known about. Many Christians were taught spanking using a very superficial approach to Bible teaching. My book is nothing of this kind of teaching at all. It is deep teaching, scholarly, studied and a comprehensive examination of a wide range of evidence to come to its conclusions about spanking.

When you take this kind of approach of coming with an open resource which is free for the reading with no obligation and no axe to grind, Christians can open their hearts to learn something new.

Thankfully I can say with much humility that since my book was released in 2002, 1000s of Christians have read it and made their decision to abandon corporal punishment. This is now documented with over 170 separate reviews from online forums, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Emails and online blogs.

For more information about this subject, please see my free e-book which can be downloaded from www.biblechild.com.

In closing, I would like to refer to one review that a friend from Australia gave me recently which referred to this text as important in her work of convincing Christians to rethink corporal punishment. It is the one which I included in the open page of the book as a key text to help orient us towards the truth of God.

“Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.

Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.” - Romans 12:17-21

Samuel Martin
New Foundation for Biblical Research
P O Box 21543
Jerusalem Israel
www.biblechild.com
Email: info@biblechild.com

"Do you understand what you are reading?" — Acts 8:30

© Samuel Martin 2026

For more on the biblical case against corporal punishment, see my six books at https://www.amazon.com/.../Samuel.../author/B00HP94ZZA... or visit www.biblechild.com to download my first book free.

If you're struggling with these issues, you're not alone. Email me at info@biblechild.com - I've corresponded with parents working through this, and I'm here to help.

Germany Rearms for Russia. Crackpot Bob Rearms His Prophecy Boner for World War III Against the USA

Well, look who just had another prophetic orgasm.

Crackpot Bob, the self-appointed prophet of the improperly named "Continuing" Church of God and full-time professional Germany-watcher, has once again discovered that Europe is spending money on its own military. And just like every single time this has happened for the last seventy years, Bob has decided this can only mean one thing: Germany is secretly gearing up to blitzkrieg the United States, conquer Canada and England, and set up concentration camps for the modern-day “tribes of Israel”.

Because of course it is.

Never mind that Germany is frantically trying to build a military that can actually deter Russia after years of watching Ukraine get turned into a meat grinder. Never mind that German leaders are openly saying they need to be “war-ready by 2029” because Moscow is the threat. Never mind that the entire current buildup is a direct response to Russian aggression and the very real possibility that the United States might not be as eager to bankroll Europe’s defense forever.

None of that matters to Bob. In his carefully curated prophetic fever dream, every new German tank, every increase in the defense budget, every European leader who says “we need to be able to defend ourselves” is secretly code for “We can’t wait to invade the United States and put the descendants of Manasseh in camps.”

This is not analysis. This is a fetish.

Armstrongism has been running this exact script since Herbert W. Armstrong was still alive and predicting the Great Tribulation would hit between 1972 and 1975. Germany was always going to rise, lead a United States of Europe, and destroy America and Britain. The only thing that ever changed was the date. The prophecy failed. Then it failed again. Then it failed some more. And yet the same men (and their spiritual grandchildren) keep dusting it off every time Europe buys a new rifle.

Bob has simply inherited the family business of failed prophecy and turned it into a full-time lifestyle. He watches European defense news the way some men watch adult films. A German general says the Bundeswehr needs more troops? Bob starts quivering. The EU talks about strategic autonomy? Bob reaches for his Bible and his tissues. Donald Trump pressures NATO countries to spend more on their own defense? Bob declares that Trump is unknowingly raising up the Beast so it can destroy the very nation Trump is trying to strengthen.

It’s almost touching in its pure, undiluted delusion.

The actual news is straightforward. Germany is rearming because Russia is a hostile nuclear power that has already invaded a neighboring country and is rebuilding its military at a rapid pace. European leaders are admitting what has been obvious for years: they can no longer assume the United States will indefinitely underwrite their security. That is not the rise of the King of the North. That is basic national self-interest after decades of free-riding.

But basic national self-interest does not get Crackpot Bob out of bed in the morning. Only the thrilling possibility that Germany might one day put Americans in camps does that.

So once again we are treated to the same tired parade of scriptures ripped out of context, the same Lamentations passage about “friends becoming enemies,” the same Daniel 11 fantasy in which modern Germany is somehow both the ancient King of the North and the final Beast power that will conquer the United States. The same prophecy that has been “almost here” for longer than most of Bob’s readers have been alive.

Germany is arming itself against Russia. Bob is arming himself against reality.

And somewhere in Arroyo Grande, the crackpot prophet is smiling that strange little smile, convinced that this time—this time for sure—the tanks are finally coming for the United States.

He can hardly wait.

Bwana Bob’s Magical Chain of Custody: How the Crackpot Prophet Rewrites History to Claim His Cult Ancestors Gave Us the Bible

 

Bwana Bob’s Magical Chain of Custody: How the Crackpot Prophet Rewrites History to Claim His Cult Gave Us the Bible

Bob Thiel has once again treated us to one of his signature historical performances. In a recent piece, the self-appointed prophet of the improperly named "Continuing" Church of God informs the world that the Roman Catholic Church did not “give” humanity the Bible, the Eastern Orthodox did not, and the Protestants certainly did not—because all of them formalized their canons too late. Therefore, he declares, only “the Church of God” maintained an unbroken chain of custody of the biblical books from the moment the Apostle John handed them to Polycarp of Smyrna. And, of course, Thiel’s own 21st-century splinter is the living continuation of that pure, continuous church.

This is not history. It is cult revisionism of the purest Armstrongist variety: invent a continuous, doctrinally pure lineage that somehow survived the centuries in secret, then place yourself at the end of the line so that your group alone possesses the true faith and the true Bible. The rest of Christianity is reduced to a late, corrupted afterthought.

Thiel’s opening move is a classic. He notes that the Catholic Church formally defined its canon at the Council of Trent in 1546 and that the Eastern Orthodox finalized theirs at the Synod of Jerusalem in 1672. From this he concludes that these churches could not have “given the world the Bible,” because God would never leave His true church without the written Word for centuries.

This is a deliberate misrepresentation of how canons actually form. The books of the New Testament were written in the first century and circulated among Christian communities long before any council. By the late second century the core of the New Testament was already widely recognized and quoted as Scripture by writers across the Mediterranean world. The Muratorian Fragment (late second century), Origen, Eusebius, and Athanasius’s 39th Festal Letter of 367 all show a New Testament list that is essentially the one we have today. The formal conciliar decisions of the fourth through seventeenth centuries were not the moment the books suddenly became Scripture; they were the moment the churches officially closed the list against remaining disputes and, later, against Protestant challenges.

Trent did not invent the New Testament. It reaffirmed a long-settled collection while defending the deuterocanonical books against the Reformers. The Eastern churches followed a similar path. To pretend that Christians somehow lived for fifteen centuries without a recognized New Testament is simply false. The books were copied, read, preached, and treated as authoritative long before any council stamped them with finality.

Thiel next observes that the Protestant churches came out of the Roman Catholic Church and therefore could not have preserved the Bible either. True enough as a statement of historical sequence, and completely irrelevant. The Protestant Reformers inherited the same New Testament that the late medieval Western church had been reading for centuries. They rejected certain Old Testament books; they did not invent a new New Testament. The claim that only a hidden “Church of God” could have kept the books pure is an assertion without evidence, not an argument.

Here is where the revisionism becomes truly cartoonish. Thiel asserts that “from the beginning the Church of God did and has maintained the chain of custody since the Apostle John handed down the books and the knowledge of the canon to Polycarp of Smyrna, who passed this on to others.”

Polycarp of Smyrna was a real historical figure, a disciple of John, and a martyr. His surviving letter to the Philippians shows a man who treated the writings of Paul and other apostolic material as authoritative. What it does not show is a second-century Armstrongist. There is no British Israelism, no insistence on the full package of Holy Days as binding on Gentile Christians, no rejection of the emerging catholic structure of the church, no claim that only a tiny remnant kept the pure faith while the rest of Christianity apostatized. Polycarp was part of the network of churches that would become the mainstream catholic tradition of Asia Minor. The Quartodeciman controversy over the date of Passover is real history; the leap from that local practice to “the Church of God has always kept the pure canon and pure doctrine” is pure invention.

Armstrongist historiography has long specialized in stitching together a secret succession of true believers—Polycarp to the Paulicians to the Waldenses to the Anabaptists to Herbert Armstrong—while ignoring the actual beliefs of those groups. Most of the medieval groups claimed as ancestors were not Sabbath-keepers in the Armstrongist sense, did not teach British Israelism, and did not hold the distinctive package of doctrines Thiel now presents as the historic faith. The “continuous chain of custody” is a theological necessity for the cult narrative, not a documented historical reality.

The purpose of the claim is not scholarly. It is institutional. If only “the Church of God” preserved the Bible and the true understanding of it from the beginning, then every other Christian body is illegitimate. Authority, doctrine, and ultimately loyalty and financial support flow to the one group that claims the unbroken line. In Thiel’s hands that group is the Continuing Church of God. The same pattern appears in every Armstrongist splinter: invent the pure remnant, place yourself inside it, and declare everyone else compromised.

The actual history is far less convenient. The New Testament books were written, copied, and circulated by ordinary Christian communities across the Roman world. Consensus about the core collection emerged gradually through use, quotation, and debate. Later councils formalized what had already become the working canon. No secret Sabbath-keeping hierarchy was required to keep the texts from vanishing. Manuscript evidence, patristic citations, and the simple fact that we possess the books today all point to widespread transmission, not to a hidden elite.

Bob Thiel’s article is not an exercise in careful historical reasoning. It is an exercise in identity construction. By rewriting the story of the canon so that only “the Church of God” could have preserved it, he positions his own tiny organization as the sole legitimate heir of the apostles. The Catholic Church is dismissed for formalizing the canon “too late.” The Orthodox are dismissed for the same reason. The Protestants are dismissed for being born too late. Polycarp is recruited as an unwitting dupe in the soon coming Armstrongist empire. And the actual, messy, well-documented process by which the churches of the second through fourth centuries recognized the books they already treated as Scripture is simply ignored.

This is cult revisionism. It is the same move Herbert Armstrong made, the same move every successive self-appointed prophet in Armstrongism has made: claim the exclusive historical franchise so that dissent becomes apostasy and your authority becomes self-evident. The Bible does not need Bob Thiel’s imaginary chain of custody. It survived because real Christian communities, imperfect and diverse, copied it, read it, and handed it on. That is the actual history. Everything else is theater.

Floating Jackasses, Floating Coordinator Generals, Floating Prophets, and Wade Cox

Ladies and gentlemen, gather round (preferably while still attached to the floor). Wade Cox, Coordinator General of yet another splinter of the never-ending Armstrongist calendar wars, has issued his latest bulletin from the front lines of imaginary Armageddon. This time the villain isn’t just the Hillel calendar, the Deep State, or those naughty Jews who dared intercalate a month. No, this month’s special guest star is… gravity itself.

Apparently on 12 August some scientists (unnamed, of course) have warned that Earth’s gravitational field will take a seven-second coffee break. Seven whole seconds! Long enough for every self-appointed end-time calculator to float gently into the stratosphere while clutching their sacred day-counts like 1260, 1264, 1330, 1331 and 1335. Because nothing says “Thus saith the Lord” quite like a spreadsheet of prophetic days and a sudden inability to stay on the ground.

Wade helpfully suggests we all stand in door frames. Because when the laws of physics momentarily clock out, the best defense is architectural door jambs. One can almost hear the ancient Israelites muttering, “If only we had stood under the lintel during the Babylonian siege…”

And of course the usual threats follow: next year the Hillel calendar will be a month off, therefore every Jew and every Church of God that still uses it will start dying on the wrong feast days. Their ministers first, naturally. Repent by 2028 or lose your First Resurrection season ticket forever. The only calendar that saves is the one Wade happens to be selling this week.

Now contrast this floating circus with the New Covenant.

Jesus never once said, “Verily I say unto you, unless ye correctly intercalate the months and stand in a doorway when gravity hiccups, ye shall in no wise enter the kingdom.” He said the law and the prophets were fulfilled in Him. He offered rest, not another 1,260-day countdown. He never required a Temple calendar, never threatened people with death for keeping the wrong new moon, and never warned that a temporary lapse in gravity would be the instrument of divine judgment.

The New Covenant is not a more accurate spreadsheet. It is the end of the spreadsheet. No more “keep this exact day or die.” No more “the Deep State is about to cancel gravity so repent.” No more floating prophets, floating hippos, floating jackasses, and floating men waving Bibles while the actual Messiah is busy being the once-for-all sacrifice.

Wade’s message is the same old Armstrongist product in a new bottle: fear, precise numbers, and the promise that only his group has the correct calendar. The New Covenant simply says: Christ is enough. The rest is noise… and, on 12 August apparently, temporary weightlessness.

So if gravity does take those seven seconds off, try not to float past Wade. He’ll probably still be counting the days on the way up. 

Why does Armstrongism get stupider by the day?

Sabbath 05/05/49/120

Dear Friends

Today is the Fifth day of the Fifth month 49/120. Today is the Fifth of Ab which is a noted day of calamity in ancient Israel. It is usually brought about by the breach of God's Laws, and we are now about to see the catastrophes develop as we saw in the New Moon Message for this month and the paper Fate of the USA, Canada and the Commonwealth under the Satanic Calendar (No. 156Kiii). We are about to be brought to repentance by WWIII and by the Witnesses (Nos. 135; 141D) over 1260 days and then by the Messiah and the Host on the 1264th day. Christ and the Host will then subjugate the world from the 1264th day to the 1330th day and the Second Exodus to Israel will occur on the 1331st to the 1335th day. 

 

This month of Ab is set to be of great Interest to Israel and the nations around the world that have such links back to the ancient tribal groups of Israel. Traditionally the worst days are from 5 to 10 Ab and then on over the devastation caused by the crises. There was a warning issued a few months ago by the scientists that on the last day of the Fifth Month, that is on the 12th of August, there will be a lapse in gravity for seven seconds and it is stated to cancel earth's gravitational field. It should be guarded against and all should be aware. It could cause serious accidents and injuries. Positioning oneself within secure structures like door frames etc may protect the individual. It may not be of any consequence, but it might, and we should limit our exposure. It may be another ruse of the Deep State; one can never be sure...

Next year in 2027 the Hillel Calendar will be a month out due to the Babylonian Intercalations and the entire Jewish people and the Churches of God that follow Hillel will be entirely at risk and are not under the protection of God on any of those days in Hillel. They will begin to be killed on any day they keep under the Hillel Calendar. It will start with their ministry from that year onwards to punish their ministry and to drive them to repentance. Judah has corrupted the Temple Calendar with its traditions and the false prophets, Dugger and Armstrong, corrupted the Churches of God with the Hillel heresy and sent all following them to the Second Resurrection (No. 143B) and cost them their positions in the First Resurrection for all time...

The only chance the Sardis and Laodicean systems have is to repent and keep the Law and the Testimony and the Temple Calendar that flows from the Law. You must repent by 2028 to have any chance of the First Resurrection (Nos. 143A and 143E above).

Today we begin the series on Samuel, Kings and Chronicles over the next months ahead.

Wade Cox

Coordinator General

Building Patience While You Have A Profitable Sabbath?

 

The Importance of Patience: Today, our societies are focused on instant gratification. Yet God has a different priority, and we are to develop His perspective (Philippians 2:5). The Scriptures reveal that God places a premium on developing patience (Luke 8:15; Romans 12:12; 1 Peter 2:20), because He is patient (1 Peter 3:20) and patience is one of the fruits of His Spirit (Galatians 5:22; Ephesians 4:2). God uses trials to help us develop patience (James 1:3–4). As part of God’s plan to prepare them for their future roles, Abraham and Sarah waited decades for a promised son (Genesis 12:4; 17:17), Joseph spent years in prison (Genesis 39:20; 41:1, 14), Moses herded sheep for 40 years (Exodus 2:21–25; 3:1), and David endured persecution (Psalm 37:7; 40:1). We need to remember God’s promise that “those who wait on the Lord… shall mount up with wings like eagles” (Isaiah 40:31). Let’s strive to develop real godly patience, because that is what God is looking for in each of us.

Have a profitable Sabbath,

Douglas S. Winnail

Nothing substantial is wrong with the content on patience itself. The verses cited are accurate, the biblical examples are real, and the call to develop patience as a fruit of the Spirit is standard Christian teaching. God is patient, trials produce endurance, and waiting on the Lord is repeatedly commanded. That part is fine.

The problems appear in the source, the framework, and the closing line—especially when measured against the New Testament’s teaching on the New Covenant.

“Have a profitable Sabbath” is not a neutral greeting. In Living Church of God / Armstrongism it functions as a doctrinal marker. It assumes that the seventh-day Sabbath remains a binding covenant obligation for Christians today.  Under the New Covenant that assumption does not hold:

• Colossians 2:16–17 treats “a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath” as “a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.”
• Romans 14:5–6 allows freedom of conscience on days.
• Galatians 4:9–11 warns against returning to “weak and worthless elementary principles” that include calendar observances.
• Hebrews 4 presents the true “Sabbath rest” as entering God’s rest by faith in Christ’s finished work, not by weekly calendar-keeping.

Greeting people with “profitable Sabbath” quietly re-imposes an Old-Covenant boundary marker that the apostles said has been fulfilled and set aside. That is the clearest “wrong” element in the message.

LCG teaches that the New Covenant does not do away with “the law of God” (understood to include the weekly Sabbath, annual holy days, clean meats, etc.), that Christians enter it at baptism by covenanting to keep those commandments, and that what we experience now is only a “foretaste” for the firstfruits.  That framework turns even a good topic like patience into something that sits inside a performance-oriented system. Patience becomes one more quality you must “strive to develop” while also carefully observing the right days, the right diet, and the right calendar—exactly the kind of external measuring that the New Covenant was designed to replace with the internal work of the Spirit (Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 8:10; Galatians 5:22–23; Romans 8:2–4).

Armstrongism has always been slow on patience. It has a long record of date-setting, urgent timelines, and “this is the final warning” rhetoric that repeatedly failed (1972/1975 expectations under Armstrong, later adjustments in the splinter groups, etc.). Preaching patience while living in a culture of prophetic urgency and tight hierarchical control is inconsistent. True New-Covenant patience rests in the certainty that Christ has already secured the future; it does not need constant recalculations of “how much longer.”

The paragraph on patience is biblically sound. What is wrong is the theological package it comes in: a system that keeps the form of Old-Covenant Sabbath observance while claiming to be under the New Covenant. That package confuses shadow with substance, external day-keeping with the rest that is already available in Christ, and Spirit-produced fruit with law-regulated performance.  

Under the New Covenant, the call is simpler: walk by the Spirit, and the fruit—including patience—will grow. You do not need a weekly calendar check-in to make it “profitable.”

Silent Pilgrim

CGI and Bill Watson: Why Being Nice Does Not Work

 

You Can’t Be Nice To Bill Watson!

 

In a sermon to the Atlanta congregation of CGI this past Sabbath, Bill Watson attempted to spin his departure from that organization as a brave and heroic act. Indeed, Watson implied that he did what he did to remain true to himself and his principles and suggested that CGI’s leadership was allowing error and sinfulness to creep into their midst! He went on to assert his own integrity and insinuated that association with any organization would inevitably lead one to compromise his/her integrity. Hence, while he stated that he wasn’t looking for followers, he encouraged folks to analyze and investigate what was happening and join him in remaining faithful to “THE TRUTH.”

“Why would CGI provide Bill with this platform?” you ask. After discussing this very question with some of the leadership of CGI, my impression is that they are still trying to extend the hand of fellowship/friendliness to Bill. Unfortunately, many of them still can’t bring themselves to believe that their former minister could be so manipulative and malicious. Mr. Watson smiles and talks about different gifts and administrations while insisting that he alone has the courage and conviction to insist on righteousness – both within the ACOG culture and the culture of the country as a whole! In short, Bill has developed the skillset of a snake oil salesman. He won’t just come right out and say that he’s right and everyone else is wrong, or that what he’s selling will work. Instead, he suggests, implies, insinuates, and gives the impression to others that he has suffered for righteousness’ sake at the hands of unscrupulous and sinful men working to suppress his truth!

Interestingly, Mr. Watson went to Paul’s first epistle to the saints at Corinth for proof that he was on the right track – that he had acted with integrity and in accordance with Scripture in his dealings with CGI. You know, the one where the apostle wrote: “I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, ‘I follow Paul,’ or ‘I follow Apollos,’ or ‘I follow Cephas,’ or ‘I follow Christ.’ Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” (I Corinthians 1:10-17, ESV) Try spinning that one, Mr. Watson!

Watson went on to quote from Paul’s discussion of the various gifts within the Church (I Corinthians 12:4-11). We must not forget, however, that this discussion of different gifts is followed by this: “For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, ‘Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,’ that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, ‘Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,’ that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you,’ nor again the head to the feet, ‘I have no need of you.’ On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.” (I Corinthians 12:14-26, ESV) How can anyone spin this to justify separating him/herself from the body? Never underestimate an ACOG minister!

Mr. Watson then proceeded to make fun of the folks who insist on speaking about LOVE. He implied that they used love as an excuse to get away from obedience and faithfulness. Paul, however, followed his remarks about gifts with this: “And I will show you a still more excellent way.” (I Corinthians 12:31, ESV) This, of course, is followed by the LOVE chapter of the Bible! Paul wrote: “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.” (I Corinthians 13:1-3, ESV) He went on to conclude: “So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (I Corinthians 13:13, ESV)

Mr. Watson would have everyone in his audience believe that the times we live in are so evil and precarious that each and every one of us is really on our own. He quoted from Paul’s epistle to the saints at Philippi, but he once again left off a crucial part of the message. We read there: “Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. Do all things without grumbling or disputing, that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, holding fast to the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain. Even if I am to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all. Likewise, you also should be glad and rejoice with me.” (Philippians 2:12-18, ESV) Once again, the message is focused on unity – on making it into the Kingdom together.

Mr. Watson even managed to get a couple of his conspiracy theories into the message. He talked about chem trails and hinted at strange happenings on the world stage involving Venezuela, Iran, and China. In short, Bill Watson is a self-righteous and unapologetic advocate for headline theology and that “good,” old-time religion (as preached by Herbert W Armstrong)! Mr. Watson is like the servant who took what had been gifted to him many years ago and buried it in the ground to protect it!

The truth, however, is far removed from what Watson is currently selling. I have it on good authority that Watson was operating in direct defiance of the organization which employed him – and for several years prior to his departure. In short, Mr. Watson diverted tithe money away from CGI and kept it in Medina to support his own agenda and designs! “Isn’t that called stealing?” you ask. That’s what I would call it, but that’s just me. I’m sure Mr. Watson would say that he was acting to “protect” God’s tithe money from abuse by those evildoers at headquarters. We should also note that Watson used that money to buy “his” church building back from CGI, and that he continues to use that property and its resources to this day. It is now a part of his Church of God Independent Ministries! Integrity? Courage? Honesy? Those are NOT words that I would use to describe Pastor Bill Watson of Medina, Ohio! What do you think?

 

Lonnie Hendrix/Miller Jones

 

From Judas Kyriakos to Bob Thiel: The Longest Game of Apostolic Succession in Church History

 

No, Bob Thiel is not in any line of succession from Judas/Judah Kyriakos. The claim is pure speculative fan-fiction dressed up as restored apostolic history, the kind of thing that would make even the most dedicated conspiracy-map hobbyist blush. 

Judah Kyriakos (also Judas of Jerusalem) is a real enough figure in the sparse early sources: according to Eusebius and Epiphanius, the fifteenth (and last Hebrew-descent) bishop of Jerusalem, described as a great-grandson of Jude (the brother of Jesus) and thus one of the desposyni. Eusebius lists the short-lived Hebrew bishops up to him and notes they “received the knowledge of Christ in purity.” After the Bar Kokhba revolt and Hadrian’s ban on Jews in the rebuilt Aelia Capitolina (~135 AD), a non-Jewish bishop named Marcus/Mark takes over. That’s roughly where the actual historical trail ends for this Judas. Later legends muddle him with a completely different Judas Cyriacus associated with the True Cross story centuries afterward. There is no continuous, documented episcopal line from him through Pella to Edessa (or anywhere else) that survives into later centuries with the doctrines Thiel wants. 

Thiel’s version invents the rest: Judas “fled” the “antichrist” Markus who compromised by staying in Jerusalem, possibly went to Pella then Edessa, and somehow anchors a “speculative succession list” of leaders there that conveniently lines up with the practices Thiel prefers (avoiding unclean meats, binitarian Godhead, more literal reading of Scripture, Sabbath/holy days). He admits the list is speculative. From there it leaps across nearly two millennia of “true church in the wilderness,” through Herbert W. Armstrong’s church-era schema, various Worldwide Church of God offshoots, a private anointing that supposedly transferred a “mantle” and “double portion,” and finally lands on Bob himself as the one restoring knowledge that was “basically unknown in the 20th century.” Daniel’s increase of knowledge and HWA’s predictions are drafted as supporting prophecy. The punchline is that only two groups of professing Christians really exist today: the ones with God’s Spirit who contend for the faith once delivered (guess who), and everyone else. 

This is not succession. It is a choose-your-own-adventure history where gaps are filled with “might have,” “logical,” and “we consider.” Actual apostolic succession claims (Catholic, Orthodox, etc.) at least attempt continuous, named, historically attested chains of ordination in recognized sees. Thiel’s version has an early list from Eusebius, then fog, legend, and self-referential COG genealogy ending in a 21st-century website and YouTube sermons. No serious historian traces an unbroken pure line of Sabbath-keeping, holy-day-observing, binitarian, unclean-meat-avoiding bishops from Judas of Jerusalem to Arroyo Grande.

Now the New Covenant part, which renders the whole exercise even more absurd. The New Covenant (Jeremiah 31; Hebrews 8–10) is not maintained by blood relatives of Jesus, speculative bishop lists, or geographic flight paths from Hadrian. It is ratified by Christ’s blood, written on hearts and minds, with Jesus as the permanent high priest after the order of Melchizedek. The old genealogical and cultic structures are obsolete. Scripture itself warns against endless genealogies and speculative controversies (1 Timothy 1:4; Titus 3:9). The “faith once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3) is the apostolic gospel centered on Christ, not a reconstructed package of second-century Jewish-Christian practices filtered through 20th-century Armstrongism and then declared the sole pure remnant. Claiming that knowledge of the “original” faith was largely lost until the last generation, only to be restored by one particular offshoot leader, treats the Holy Spirit as if He went on a 1,900-year sabbatical and needed Bob’s research notes to clock back in.

Markus of Jerusalem is not an “antichrist” in the sources; he is simply the first non-Jewish bishop after the Jewish ones could no longer reside there. The idea that fleeing equals faithfulness while remaining equals apostasy is a convenient binary that lets later groups anoint themselves the pure continuation. Desposyni still existed in the fourth century according to some reports, but that does not create a secret pure pipeline to modern California. And the notion that true Christians are defined by a short checklist of distinctive practices (plus recognizing Thiel’s group) is classic remnant theology, not New Covenant reality.

In short: Judas Kyriakos was a late-second-century Jewish Christian bishop whose trail goes cold. Bob Thiel is a post-Armstrong COG independent who built a speculative bridge of “maybes” and then declared himself on the far side of it. The New Covenant does not run on that kind of paperwork. The claim is historically groundless, theologically unnecessary, and comically self-serving.

Armstrongism’s Final Prophecy Comes True: They Would Indeed Be Persecuted… by Complete Public Indifference

 

A comment on "Same Old Yoke, Same Old Excuses – Must Be the Members’ Fault Again"

It is truly ironic that a dynamic movement which in its heyday warned the world of the end times would end up fizzling out and decaying right along with the world it once warned. One once expected this voice to rise to its highest crescendo as surrounding conditions evolved to their worst and became intolerable. So effective would be this message that we were supposed to be persecuted and expelled for this! And, it is so easy to get deported today!

It seems perfectly obvious that the splinters are clueless and have lost the gift of messaging. With the proliferation of "the influencer" on the internet, how is it that nobody has been able to tap into and exploit the old Armstrongism in such a way as to go viral? It's really kind of mind-boggling, isn't it? If God were truly behind them, all it would take would be a divine nod, wink, or smile, and they would be everywhere! Instead, we find them waddling in their paranoia over a few well-placed termites or strategically released farts from Satan, who most likely could care less their so-called work! Cowabunga!

You people who are out there making Banned part of your sabbath AM studies realize that my comment this morning is not wrong!

In an era when any teenager with a ring light and a TikTok account can command a global audience before breakfast or a twenty-something guy can expose massive fraud of taxpayers' money, the heirs of Armstrongism cannot make their “urgent” end-time warning travel farther than the next church basement. They have the internet, the algorithms, the free platforms, and a ready-made catalog of dramatic prophecies. What they lack is the ability—or the will—to package any of it in a way that anyone outside their shrinking circle actually wants to hear.  

If God were truly behind them, all it would take would be a divine nod, wink, or smile, and they would be everywhere. Instead, they are nowhere. The absence of that viral breakthrough is not a mystery; it is the evidence. A message that cannot spread even when the tools for global distribution are handed to it on a silver platter is a message that has already been weighed and found wanting.  

Rather than adapt, the remaining groups have retreated into the safest possible activity: paranoia. They spend their energy hunting termites in the walls and detecting strategically released farts from Satan while the actual work of reaching the public is left undone. The result is a collection of tiny, self-referential echo chambers whose loudest noise is the sound of their own mutual suspicion.  

That is why none of them are known around the world for their message. World leaders have no idea who they are. No magazines or video productions influence large audiences. Not because the world is too wicked to listen. Not because persecution has silenced them. But because the message itself has become unhearable—clumsy, outdated, and delivered by people more interested in guarding the last remaining vestages of 1970/80s Armstrongism than in speaking to anyone outside them.  

Cowabunga, indeed! 

Same Old Yoke, Same Old Excuses – Must Be the Members’ Fault Again

 

These are some more of the issues UCG says they need to work on, as discussed in their Council of Elders Report 2026. 

• Respect for One Another
• Recognizing Jesus’ command to always treat each other in a godly manner, we believe we have sometimes not treated each other in a godly manner. Therefore, we will dedicate ourselves to:
• Recognize our different personalities and strive to understand one another.
• Reconcile and restore/rebuild relationships in the love that God the Father and Jesus Christ have shown us.

Barriars

Not being able to stand out over the noise.

Poorly skilled speakers.

Not passing the baton/lack of trust.

Lack of focus on doctrine.

Tired, stressed over pastors.

Unresolved issues from the past.

Lack of communicating improvements to stakeholders.

Resistance to change internally.

Reticence to collaborate.

Ineffective internal processes.

Misconceptions about Church finances.

The United Church of God’s Council of Elders has once again emerged from its latest meeting clutching a strategic plan report that reads like a greatest-hits album of excuses first pressed in the mid-1990s. After thirty years of proclaiming they alone possess “the truth,” the leadership has diagnosed why the Church has not been successful with a list of barriers that would be comical if it weren’t so predictable: poorly skilled speakers, tired and stressed pastors, lack of trust in “passing the baton,” unresolved issues from the past, resistance to change, reticence to collaborate, ineffective internal processes, misconceptions about finances, and the inability to stand out over the noise. Oh, and a solemn pledge to finally start treating one another with respect, recognizing different personalities, and reconciling relationships in the love of the Father and Jesus Christ.

This is the same tired script the Churches of God have been running since the Worldwide Church of God imploded. The problem is never the message. It is never the heavy yoke of mandatory Sabbath-keeping, annual holy days, clean meats, tithing schemes, and hierarchical control dressed up as “God’s government.” No, the real culprits are the members who resist change, the pastors who are exhausted from carrying the load, the speakers who lack polish, and the lingering grudges from decades of splits, disfellowshipments, and power struggles. Leadership’s solution? Try harder to be nicer to each other while doubling down on the same doctrinal package that has produced declining attendance, aging congregations, and perpetual internal friction since the 1990s.

From a New Covenant perspective, this is pure legalist nonsense. The New Covenant is not a slightly friendlier version of the Old with Jesus as the new high priest enforcing the same shadows. It is the radical replacement of the old system: the law written on hearts by the Spirit rather than on tablets of stone (Jeremiah 31; Hebrews 8), the end of the sacrificial and ceremonial system fulfilled in Christ, the priesthood of all believers instead of a professional ministerial class that hoards authority, and freedom from the yoke that neither the apostles nor their fathers could bear (Acts 15).   The gospel is the announcement of grace, justification by faith apart from works of the law, and life in the Spirit—not a never-ending campaign to prove that Saturday is the correct day and pork is still forbidden.

UCG’s barriers are the inevitable fruit of trying to grow a New Testament church with an Old Covenant operating system. “Not passing the baton/lack of trust”? That is what hierarchical control produces when the ministry functions more like a modern Levitical caste than a body where every member is a living stone and priest. “Tired, stressed over pastors”? Burnout is the natural result when a small group of men are expected to carry the spiritual load for people who are treated as perpetual dependents rather than Spirit-empowered adults. “Poorly skilled speakers” and “lack of focus on doctrine”? When the core content is endless proof-texting to keep the shadows binding, passion and relevance dry up. “Unresolved issues from the past” and “resistance to change”? Legalism breeds identity around rules and exclusive truth claims; any suggestion that the package needs rethinking feels like betrayal of God Himself. “Not standing out over the noise”? Of course not. In a world hungry for grace, hope, and genuine freedom in Christ, another group insisting on calendar observance and dietary restrictions as marks of the true church simply blends into the background of religious irrelevance.

The “Respect for One Another” statement is particularly rich. After decades of splits, accusations of heresy, and top-down discipline that treated dissent as rebellion against God, the Council has discovered that Jesus commanded them to treat each other in a godly manner. They will now “recognize different personalities” and “reconcile relationships.” One can almost hear the collective sigh of members who have heard this exact language after every previous crisis, only to watch the same patterns repeat. True New Covenant community flows from the Spirit producing the fruit of love, joy, peace, patience, and kindness—not from another strategic plan that treats relational failure as a secondary issue while the root remains untouched.

This is not analysis; it is diagnosis by deflection. The same old story has been proclaimed since the 1990s: if only the members would try harder, trust more, speak better, collaborate better, and stop holding onto past wounds, the work would finally take off. The uncomfortable truth under the New Covenant is simpler and more liberating. The barriers are not primarily skills gaps, communication failures, or personality conflicts. They are the predictable consequences of clinging to a system of performance and control that the finished work of Christ has already rendered obsolete. 

Until the wineskins are changed, the same list of excuses will keep appearing in the next report, and the one after that, and the one after that.