Thursday, August 20, 2026

Bwana Bob’s Exclusive Bible Franchise: From the Apostles Straight to Arroyo Grande, CA


Bob Thiel’s grand claim is that the true “Church of God” alone possessed and preserved the New Testament canon (and for that matter, the ENTIRE Bible) from the apostles forward, that Catholics and Protestants were latecomers and interlopers, and that this pure chain of custody somehow terminates in his own “Continuing” Church of God in 2026. This is not history. It is pure fictional COG mythology.

There was no organization in the first or second century that looked, taught, or behaved like modern Armstrongism. The groups Thiel waves at (Nazarenes, certain Asia Minor congregations, later Waldenses) did not keep the Armstrong package: British-Israel identity, the specific holy-day calendar HWA adopted, the rejection of the Trinity in the exact way the COGs do, the mandatory third tithe, or the “one true church” hierarchical structure that ends with a living apostle/prophet. Claiming them as “our people” is the same move every restorationist group makes: find someone who kept the Sabbath or rejected Rome and declare them your spiritual grandparents.

Bwana Bob's “chain of custody” is pure mythology. Yes, the apostles and their immediate successors knew which writings were authoritative. That is not news. What is news is the leap that only a continuous, doctrinally pure “Church of God” line ever possessed them while the rest of Christendom wandered in darkness. Polycarp of Smyrna is claimed by Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants as one of their own early witnesses. He did not hand a sealed packet of 27 books to a secret COG courier with instructions to keep it away from those nasty Greco-Romans. The early lists, quotes, and disputes show a broad Christian community gradually recognizing the same core writings. The fact that some later Catholics and Orthodox included extra books (or temporarily disputed a few) does not magically transfer ownership of the canon to a 20th-century American splinter movement.

Crackpot Bob's timeline is a classic Armstrongist history rewrite. It treats every mention of “sacred scriptures” by an early writer as proof of the full modern Protestant canon already locked down and exclusive to “us.” Then it jumps centuries, waves at the Waldenses (who were not Church of God or Armstrongist in nature), skips the total absence of anything resembling the Radio Church of God or Worldwide Church of God for most of Christian history, and lands triumphantly on Herbert Armstrong in the 1930s. From there it is only a short, bitter hop through successive splits until Bob Thiel declares that his group now holds the true custodianship. This is not a chain. It is a series of historical non-sequiturs connected by wishful thinking and the magic phrase “Church of God.”

The claim that “the Bible is entirely a COG project” is laughable on its face. The books were written by first-century Jewish and Gentile believers, circulated among multiple congregations, quoted by a wide range of early Christian writers, and eventually standardized through the broader church’s process of recognition. No exclusive COG copyright office existed. The idea that God left His word only with a tiny, mostly invisible flock that somehow resurfaces every few centuries just long enough to hand the baton to the next true remnant is the same mythology every exclusive group tells itself.

Bwana Bob's endpoint is pure farce. Even if one granted every previous claim, the final link—“and therefore the Continuing Church of God under Bob Thiel is the true custodial church in 2026”—requires believing that a man who left Living Church of God over personality and prophetic disagreements, started his own group, and began issuing dreams and self-promotions is the living terminus of the apostolic canon. That is not continuity. That is a man writing himself into the story replacing God's hand in the entire matter.

Greco-Roman and Protestant churches have their own historical problems and anachronisms. That does not make Thiel’s alternative true by default. Two competing myths do not produce one historical fact. The books of the New Testament were recognized, preserved, and transmitted by the wider Christian movement. The idea that only one tiny, doctrinally specific stream ever truly “had” them is the kind of claim that sounds profound only if you already need it to be true.

In short: the apostles wrote letters. Later Christians recognized them. Centuries of ordinary transmission followed. Then, in the 20th century, a former advertising man in Oregon decided he had restored the true church. Decades of splits later, Bob Thiel decided he was the final custodian. That is not a chain of custody. That is pure Armstrongite myth making..

Wednesday, August 19, 2026

Crackpot Prophet Tries To "One Up" Wade Cox's 2030 Date by Claiming Christ Returns 2033/34

 


We had wade Cox opening his asinine mouth the other day about Jesus retiring in 2030. Now Crackpot Bob is trying to one up Wade and claim Jesus is returning in 2033/34, maybe, possibly, could be, might be...you know the drill by now.

Bwana Bob Thiel has once again blessed us with another installment of “Let’s Play Calendar Roulette with the Gospels,” this time courtesy of Jordan’s very practical plan to cash in on Christian tourism for the alleged 2,000th anniversary of Jesus’ baptism in 2030. Because nothing says “divine timeline revealed” quite like a Muslim kingdom building a $120 million pilgrim village, museum, and green corridor so Western tourists can selfie next to the spot where John dunked the Messiah. New Covenant Christianity? Islam? End-times speculation? Strap in, folks—this one’s a triple-threat of stretch marks.

Under the New Covenant—you know, the thing Crackpot Bob never talks about, the one actually sealed by Christ’s blood, where we’re no longer slaves to speculative arithmetic or Mosaic stopwatches—most of us are content to watch, pray, and live as if He could return tomorrow or in a thousand years. Jesus Himself said no one knows the day or hour (Matthew 24:36), and the apostles treated “the last days” as the entire church age, not a pair of neat 1,000-year “days” that conveniently start ticking just before the resurrection so we can land the plane in 2034. 

 But Bob? He takes the minority view that baptism was in 30 AD (most scholars still prefer 27–29), assumes a rigid 3½-year ministry, slides the resurrection to 34 AD, then invents a “days 5 and 6 of the last days” framework so the Great Tribulation must kick off in 2030 and Jesus shows up by 2034. It’s the theological equivalent of using a sundial to predict the Super Bowl winner. New Covenant believers tend to roll their eyes at this exact brand of date-setting because it turns the finished work of the cross into a countdown clock for brochure sales. Spoiler: the New Covenant already delivered the Spirit, the Church, and the promise of His return—without requiring a Jordanian tourism ministry or a spreadsheet.

Islam Angle: Prophets, Tourism, and Convenient Overlaps

Bob correctly notes that Muslims revere Jesus (Isa) as Messiah and prophet, expect His return to smash the Dajjal, break the cross, and usher in a short golden age (usually 40 years, not 1,000). The Quran and hadiths do overlap with biblical themes on a future conflict involving a southern power and a northern beast-like figure. Fine. Jordan—being a Muslim-majority nation that still hosts Christian sites and likes tourist dollars—is investing heavily so more pilgrims will show up in 2030. That’s economics, not eschatology. 

Yet Bob can’t resist the prophetic cackle: “Perhaps there could be ramifications…” as if a museum groundbreaking is the first trumpet. Muslims already believe Jesus returns after their Mahdi; Christians believe He returns to destroy the Beast. The fact that both traditions talk about Jesus coming back doesn’t magically make Jordan’s visitor-center project a sign that the King of the South is warming up the tanks. It’s the same level of insight as claiming every new mosque in Europe proves the caliphate is next Tuesday. Coexistence tourism ≠ fulfillment of Daniel 11.

Now we arrive at the pièce de résistance—the part that smells exactly like Wade Cox’s old “Christ returns in 2030” charts, just with fresher paint. Bob’s chain: 
  • Baptism = 30 AD (despite the evidence leaning earlier) 
  • Ministry = exactly 3½ years → resurrection 34 AD 
  • “Last days” = literal thousand-year days 5 & 6 that somehow began before the resurrection 
  • Therefore Great Tribulation starts 2030, Jesus back by 2034
This is the classic Armstrongist parlor trick: force every number into a 6,000-year plan, ignore the scholarly consensus on the chronology, and declare “we will see,” "maybe," "possibly," "could be," "might be," Wade Cox did the same dance s few days ago with 2030 as the magic year; Bob just moved the goalposts a few years and tied it to a baptism anniversary that Jordan is promoting for the same reason Disney promotes new rides—money. Both men treat the New Testament timeline like a Sudoku puzzle that only their group has the correct pencil.  

Reality check: 
  • The baptism year is debated; 27 AD is more common. 
  • Ministry length is approximate, not a Swiss watch. 
  • “Last days” language in Acts and Hebrews is already present-tense for the apostles. 
  • Every previous generation that did this math was wrong, and Jesus still hasn’t returned on their schedule.
So yes, 2030–2033 is just as crazy as Wade Cox’s 2030 return date. It’s the same fever dream wearing a nicer suit and holding a Jordanian press release. New Covenant Christianity doesn’t need these calculations; it already has the Spirit as down payment. Islam doesn’t need them either—its own hadiths give Jesus a 40-year reign after the Dajjal, not a precise Gregorian countdown. And end-times speculation of this variety has a perfect track record: 100 % failure rate so far.

We’ll see, Bob. We’ll see. Every prediction and prophecy you have made has been an abject failure. Just don’t be surprised when 2030 arrives, the pilgrim village is full of selfie sticks, and the only “great tribulation” is the traffic jam on the road to Al-Maghtas while you are sitting at home dreaming up more lies and goalpost changes.

Wade Cox Absurdity: Jesus Returns In 2030 - Get Your Act Together So You Can Be On The Holy Seed Bus






Wade Cox’s 2030 Timeline: Another Armstrongite “Holy Seed” Fantasy That New Covenant Christians Can Safely Ignore

Wade Cox, Coordinator General of the Christian Churches of God, has once again blessed the world with a detailed prophetic roadmap. According to the latest communiqué, the next four years will unfold like a carefully scripted Armstrongite disaster movie:

  • A war
  • The Empire of the Beast
  • The arrival of the Two Witnesses 1,264 days before the Messiah
  • Their 1,260-day ministry and subsequent death
  • Four days later… the Messiah arrives in 2030
  • Satan and the Fallen Host get tossed into the pit
  • And only those who have diligently obeyed “the Law” will qualify as the Holy Seed who get to live on into the Millennium
Cox is crystal clear: “Your capacity to stay alive into the Millennium depends on your capacity to obey the Law.” The people who make it through 2030 will be the Holy Seed. Everyone else? Presumably compost.

This is classic late-stage Armstrongism. Take a handful of prophetic numbers, rearrange them until they point to a date just far enough away to keep the faithful nervous, then declare that survival itself hinges on perfect law-keeping under the authority of the one true Coordinator General. The 120th Jubilee, the Witnesses as the real educators of the planet, the careful warning not to “bring the muck of this world into the next” — it’s all there, the usual mix of chronological gymnastics and spiritual intimidation.

Armstrongite groups have been issuing these precise end-time schedules for decades. 1975 came and went. Multiple “final” dates under Herbert Armstrong, then under the various successors, came and went. David Pack has set and reset dates for Christ’s return to Wadsworth more times than most people change their oil. Ronald Weinland went to prison still insisting his timeline was correct. Bob Thiel continues to adjust his own prophetic charts while claiming special insight. And yet every new Coordinator, Pastor General, or self-appointed Elijah produces another ironclad sequence that somehow never quite arrives on schedule.

The deeper problem is not merely that the dates keep failing. It is the theology underneath. Cox’s message assumes that entrance into the Millennium is a reward for successful law performance. That is pure old-covenant thinking dressed up in Revelation charts. The New Covenant does not operate that way. Justification is by faith in the finished work of Christ, not by one’s track record of Sabbath-keeping, holy-day observance, or avoidance of “muck.” The people who inherit the kingdom are those who are in Christ, not those who managed to stay on the correct prophetic calendar and clean enough for the Coordinator General’s approval.

New Covenant believers do not need to monitor 1,264-day countdowns or worry whether they have sufficiently purified themselves to be counted among the Holy Seed of 2030. Christ already secured the future. The Spirit already indwells. The law that matters is the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, not a reconstructed Mosaic checklist administered by yet another splinter group claiming exclusive insight into the Jubilee cycles.

So when the next four years fail to produce the Beast Empire, the Witnesses, and the Messiah on Cox’s timetable (as every previous Armstrongite timetable has failed), the response from those who actually trust the New Covenant can remain simple: we were never depending on it in the first place. The same Jesus who already came, already died, already rose, and already sat down at the right hand of the Father does not require Wade Cox’s permission or timeline to finish what He started.

Never give in? To what, exactly — to another round of date-setting legalism that has already been falsified a hundred times over? Every single Church of God leader has lied to us.

New Covenant Christians can safely file this one under “more of the same” and keep walking in the freedom for which Christ set them free. The only Holy Seed that ultimately matters is the one that was planted in the ground and rose again. Everything else is commentary — and increasingly absurd commentary at that.

"...parsing the laws of Torah in light of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ"



A reader here with an SDA background sent this to me:

BB wrote:

I had read some comments years ago on one of the blogs which credited the Seventh Day Adventists with parsing the laws of Torah in light of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and also the destruction of the Temple. They started with the animal sacrifices and, of course, intuited that sacrifices are no longer required because the death of Jesus Christ serves as our eternal sacrifice. Next were the rituals such as the mikvahs. And the result became an actual hierarchy which progressed into a remnant which they believed to be in force today. If the source or my recollections are accurate, the SDAs had the mini-Torah all packaged and ready for HWA's eager plagiarism, a plagiarism to which he added his own spin as he made it his own. He had a habit of fixating on precepts which he had read in other churches' literature, and then claiming that God had revealed them to him personally. At least he was consistent in his methodology, as he applied the same tecnique to prophecy and the daily news. 

I am hoping that someone more deeply familiar with SDA history and writings will see this and might actually cite the references which will corroborate it. The Radio/Worldwide Church of God most definitely owes much to Millerism, COG7, GG Rupert, and the Mormons! Martial artist extraordinaire Bruce Lee studied many branches of the martial arts and synthesized them into his own art, which he called Jeet Kune Do. Stevie Ray Vaughan did much the same with the Blues, working the fret board and strings, applying his finger karate to his guitar in ways unknown to those before him. HWA studied the teachings of many Christian religions and synthesized them into his own super religion. Fortunately for Bruce, and SRV, there were no martial arts or Blues heresies to contaminate their artistry, or ruin people's lives!



Yes, with important qualifications. Seventh-day Adventists have long taught a structured distinction among the laws of the Torah (primarily moral vs. ceremonial, with civil/judicial often grouped with or treated similarly to the ceremonial in terms of discontinuity), interpreted in light of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection, and the end of the Temple system. This is a core, longstanding SDA position, not a fringe or modern one. It provided a ready framework that HWA and related groups adapted (with their own additions and emphases), consistent with documented influences from Adventist and Church of God (Seventh Day) literature.

Core SDA Teaching on the Laws

From the pioneers onward (including Ellen G. White and official statements), SDAs distinguish:
  • Moral law (especially the Ten Commandments / Decalogue): Eternal, reflecting God’s character, written by God’s finger on stone, placed in the ark. It existed before Sinai (in principle), was not abolished at the cross, and remains binding. The seventh-day Sabbath is treated as part of this moral core (a creation ordinance, not merely ceremonial). Transgression of it is sin.
  • Ceremonial (or ritual/typical) law: The system of animal sacrifices, priesthood, Temple/sanctuary rituals, annual feasts and sabbaths, circumcision, and related ordinances. These were temporary “shadows” or types pointing forward to Christ. They were “nailed to the cross” / abolished when type met antitype in Jesus’ death (citing Colossians 2:14–17, Ephesians 2:15, Hebrews 9–10, etc.). The tearing of the Temple veil and the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 underscored the end of that system. Continuing sacrifices after the cross would deny Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice.
  • Civil/judicial laws: Often treated as specific to ancient Israel as a theocratic nation. They expired with that national arrangement (or their “general equity” principles continue in a limited way). Many SDA discussions fold them with the ceremonial under the broader “law of Moses” or “handwriting of ordinances” that passed away, while the moral law remains.
Ellen White repeatedly emphasized the “two laws” contrast: the moral law is abiding and changeless; the ceremonial was provisional, added because of transgression, and ceased at the cross. Official SDA belief statements and commentaries reaffirm that the ceremonial system (including annual sabbaths and festivals) ended with Christ’s death, while the moral law (including the weekly Sabbath) continues. This is not a full “mini-Torah” ranked by progressive residual force in the exact hierarchical packaging some later groups used, but it is a clear parsing that retains a remnant of Torah precepts as still in force (the Decalogue + related moral principles) while discarding the sacrificial/ritual core.

Mikvahs/ritual washings fall under the ceremonial category that ended. Clean/unclean food distinctions have been more debated or retained in modified form by some Adventists (health emphasis), but the core sacrificial and Temple-centered system is unequivocally ended.

Relation to HWA

HWA did not invent the moral/ceremonial distinction—it is older Christian (and specifically Adventist) territory, with roots in broader Protestant discussions of the tripartite division (moral/ceremonial/civil), though SDAs put special weight on the Sabbath remaining moral. HWA and the Worldwide Church of God drew heavily from Seventh-day Adventist and Church of God (Seventh Day) sources early on. He retained the Sabbath, clean meats, and a version of the moral/ceremonial split, then expanded it with his own emphases (British Israelism, holy days as still binding in modified form, tithing systems, etc.) and frequently presented discoveries as personal divine revelation. Critics and researchers have long noted the pattern of borrowing from Adventist literature while claiming unique restoration.

The recollection you describe is substantially accurate on the SDA side: they did systematically set aside sacrifices and related rituals because of Christ and the end of the Temple system, retain the Decalogue (especially the Sabbath) as still binding, and package this as the continuing obligation for God’s people. Whether it was a neat “hierarchy progressing into a remnant” ready for direct plagiarism depends on the specific blog comments you recall; the foundational categories and the Christ/Temple rationale were already clearly articulated in SDA teaching long before HWA’s public work. HWA’s “spin” and claims of personal revelation fit his documented methodology across prophecy and doctrine.

Are YOU Paying Enough to Be Philadelphia? A 1966 Checklist for the Truly Special





Samuel Kitchen has reposted Leroy Neff's 1966 article on Are YOU a Philadelphia Christian?

This article has zero relevance to modern Christianity. It is pure 1960s Worldwide Church of God (Armstrongist) propaganda designed to manufacture exclusivity, enforce loyalty, extract money and effort, and keep members terrified of becoming “Laodicean.”

Leroy Neff takes the message to the church in Philadelphia in Revelation 3 and turns it into a self-congratulatory checklist for Herbert Armstrong’s organization, then headquartered in Pasadena. The logic runs like this:The WCG is the Philadelphia era because it has an “open door” (radio and the printing press). Therefore every true member must show the same “fruits”: fervent daily prayer for “the Work,” faithful tithing plus generous offerings, fasting, zeal for the organization’s growth (the famous 30% annual increase claim), submission to the ministry, awareness of personal weakness, and endurance.

Those who do this get the special promise of protection from the Great Tribulation. Everyone else (including most of “Israel” and the supposed Laodiceans) gets tortured and martyred.
Bonus reward: after the resurrection you become a “pillar” at headquarters in Jerusalem, help run the modern technological World Tomorrow, get God’s name written on you, and literally become God (same divine family as Christ, just lower rank).

This is classic Armstrongite framing: one true church, sequential church eras, British-Israel prophetic identity in the background, hierarchical authority, mandatory financial support of “the Work,” and the promise of divinity.

The church-eras theory is not Christian doctrine. Mainstream historic Christianity (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, evangelical) has never taught that Revelation 2–3 describes seven successive eras of the true church across 2,000 years, with the final two being “Philadelphia” and “Laodicea.” Those chapters are letters to seven real congregations in first-century Asia Minor. The messages contain warnings and encouragements that apply to believers in every age. Turning them into a secret timeline that conveniently ends with Herbert Armstrong’s radio work is an Armstrong invention, not New Testament teaching.

There is no biblical “Philadelphia Christian” identity test tied to one organization. The article’s entire purpose is to make members of one specific group feel uniquely special and protected while implying that everyone outside (or insufficiently zealous inside) is lukewarm and headed for tribulation. That is the opposite of the New Testament emphasis on the universal body of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, and the fruits of the Spirit rather than organizational metrics.

The “open door” and “works” claims are self-serving. Neff equates going through the open door with supporting Armstrong’s media outreach via prayer, tithes, offerings, and fasting. That is fundraising and loyalty language dressed up as Revelation. Modern Christianity does not measure spiritual standing by how much one funds a particular headquarters or how closely one matches a 1960s growth statistic.

The “we become God” teaching is outside orthodox Christianity. The article explicitly says believers will be born into God’s family and “be God, just as Christ is now God.” That is the Armstrongist God-family doctrine (sometimes called the “God-kind”). Historic Christianity rejects it. The New Testament speaks of adoption, sharing in the divine nature, and reigning with Christ; it does not teach that humans become additional members of the Godhead.
Fear-based performance religion is the opposite of the New Covenant. The piece constantly pressures readers: check your fruits, don’t let someone steal your crown, don’t become Laodicean, cry out because you are weak and helpless, keep supporting the Work or miss the place of safety. This is classic legalistic control. It produces anxiety and conformity, not the freedom and assurance the New Testament offers those who are in Christ.

This is not a serious exposition of Revelation. It is mid-1960s WCG internal messaging intended to make members feel they alone are the faithful remnant while everyone else—including the rest of Christianity—is dismissed as deficient. It has no more relevance to contemporary Christian faith and practice than a 1966 sales memo for “the Work.” The New Testament does not require you to identify with a 20th-century American radio church, measure your spirituality by its growth rate, or fear tribulation if your offerings or zeal drop.

Tuesday, August 18, 2026

Bwana Bob’s Eternal German Beast Hunt: Why Baron Guttenberg Remains the End-Time Führer No Matter What the News Says






Bob Thiel has done it again.

An AfD candidate in Saxony-Anhalt gets called “Germany’s most dangerous man” by Der Spiegel. Mainstream politicians openly discuss whether the party should be banned. Actual Germans are debating migration, crime, and the future of their democracy in real time.

And what does the self-appointed prophet of Arroyo Grande do with this material?

He uses it as yet another launch pad to remind us that the real man to watch is still… Baron Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg.

Of course he does.

For more than sixteen years Bob has been treating the former German defense minister like a prophetic lottery ticket that somehow never expires. Since at least 2009–2010 he has informed the faithful that this particular aristocratic Catholic with a long name is a prime candidate for the final King of the North, the Beast of Revelation, the Great Monarch of various medieval Catholic private revelations, and the man who will one day revive a version of the Holy Roman Empire, crush the United States, and march people off into captivity.

The latest article follows the familiar script with almost comic precision.

Yes, the AfD is rising. Yes, people are comparing them to pre-WWII conditions. Yes, Bob even recycles his own 2023 video titled “AfD: Prelude to a Hitler Beast?”

But then comes the inevitable pivot:

“Probably much more than Ulrich Siegmund. Though Ulrich Siegmund may trigger factors to get Germany to change, etc. The Baron remains someone to watch (Mark 13:37).”

There it is. The sacred formula. Whatever happens in actual German politics, the Baron is still the one.

Bob’s confidence is impressive when you remember the academic foundation supporting it.

He holds a legitimate Ph.D. in the sciences from a regionally accredited American university. That is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the idea that this equips him to function as an authoritative interpreter of biblical apocalyptic literature or as a reliable identifier of the final Beast.

His Th.D. comes from a foreign, non-regionally-accredited program that critics have repeatedly noted does not carry the weight of a recognized theological doctorate from an established seminary. In the world of serious biblical scholarship this matters. In Bob’s world it does not, because the real training program was Armstrongism itself — a system famous for identifying specific modern individuals as prophetic figures and then quietly adjusting the timeline when reality refuses to cooperate.

That training shows.

One of Bob’s favorite “proofs” is a 2011 Die Zeit interview in which Guttenberg described himself as a “political animal, a ‘zoon politikon.’”

Bob has repeated this line for years as if the Baron had casually confessed to being the Beast of Revelation.

In reality it is Aristotle’s ordinary description of human beings as social and political creatures. The German press at the time mocked Guttenberg for name-dropping classical terms he barely understood. Bob treats the same throwaway line as prophetic self-identification.

This is not exegesis. This is a man with a hammer seeing every German aristocrat as a nail.
Sixteen Years of “One to Watch”

By Bob’s own count he has been tracking Guttenberg since the late 2000s. He has published lists of “speculative predictions” that the Baron has supposedly partially fulfilled (advocating more European military cooperation, having a certain kind of background, etc.). He has even gotten excited when the man grew a beard.

Meanwhile Guttenberg left government after a plagiarism scandal, spent years in the United States, returned to Germany, and settled into the life of a well-connected consultant, crypto advisor, and occasional talking head. He is not running a political party. He is not building a new European army. He is not the chancellor-in-waiting.

Yet every time a German headline appears that can be stretched far enough, Bob dusts off the same article template and declares that the Baron is still “one to watch.”

This is the prophetic equivalent of a sports commentator who has been predicting the same aging quarterback will win the Super Bowl for a decade and a half. Eventually the audience is allowed to notice that the prediction has become more important than the evidence.

Armstrongism already had a track record of failed date-setting and overly specific identifications. Bob has taken that tendency and refined it into a permanent personality cult around one European politician who shows no particular interest in fulfilling the role assigned to him.

Catholic private revelations that mention a “Great Monarch” of certain bloodlines are treated as near-canonical. Vague similarities to Daniel 11 are elevated into near-certainty. The fact that dozens of European aristocrats over the centuries could have been made to fit the same medieval descriptions is ignored.

The result is not careful prophetic warning. It is a closed loop in which every political development in Germany is forced to orbit the same man Bob decided was special in 2010.

Ulrich Siegmund may or may not become a significant political figure. The AfD may or may not gain real power in eastern states. Germany may or may not lurch further right. Those are actual questions for actual political analysis.

Bob’s contribution is to announce that whatever happens, the Baron is still the one to watch — because Bob has been watching him for sixteen years and sees no reason to stop now.

That is not prophecy.

That is a man with no serious theological credentials from an accredited school of theology, trained in a system already famous for over-identifying people and under-delivering on timelines, who has simply found a German aristocrat he cannot let go of.

The Beast of Revelation may one day appear.

Whether Baron Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg is that man remains, after more than a decade and a half of breathless watching, exactly as unproven as it was the day Bob first typed the name.

But rest assured: the next time a German politician says something mildly interesting, Bob will be ready with the same article, the same video clip, and the same solemn declaration that the Baron remains “someone to watch.”

Some habits, it seems, are harder to break than the Holy Roman Empire.

Monday, August 17, 2026

Jim Franks’ Latest End-Time Sales Pitch: Same Old Fear, Same Old Collection Plate



Jim Franks of COGWA has once again dusted off the classic Armstrongist playbook.

In his July member letter, he opened with Matthew 24:7, listed every war, famine, disease, and earthquake currently in the news, declared that “never have we seen so many of these events, back-to-back,” and then solemnly reminded everyone that only the return of Christ can save the world. The unspoken subtext? Stay scared. Stay loyal. And while you’re at it, keep those tithe checks coming—because the end is always nearer when the offering needs a boost.

Let’s be clear. New Covenant believers do not deny that the world is broken. Wars rage. People starve. Diseases spread. The ground shakes. Jesus Himself said these things would happen. What He did not say is that every generation of self-appointed watchmen should turn the evening news into a fundraising telethon.

Armstrongism has been running this exact script for decades. In the 1960s and 1970s it was “1975 in Prophecy.” Then it was the next failed date, and the next, and the next. David Pack has made an entire career out of announcing Christ’s return to Wadsworth on a schedule that keeps getting revised. Bob Thiel regularly discovers that this year’s conflicts are the final ones. Jim Franks continues in the endless COG chorus, cataloguing conflicts from Ukraine to Sudan to Venezuela’s earthquakes as proof that “we are living in the time that Christ referred to as the end of this age.”

The pattern is transparent. Fear keeps people watching the horizon instead of examining the organization. Fear makes members feel they dare not leave “the one true church” because the Great Tribulation is just around the corner. And fear, historically, has been excellent for the budget.

New Covenant reality is different. Christ already came. He already finished the work. The Kingdom is not a distant event we must anxiously finance into existence; it is already breaking forth wherever the Spirit of the risen Lord is. We are not under a system that requires constant end-time adrenaline to stay faithful. We are free to live, love, work, raise families, and serve without the background music of perpetual panic.

Yes, we watch. Yes, we pray. “Your kingdom come” is still the right prayer. But we do not pray it while clutching our wallets in terror that the next earthquake proves our particular corporate charter is the only safe place. We pray it as people who already belong to the One who has overcome the world.

So when the next COGWA or XCOG letter arrives listing the latest wars and pestilences and urging us not to “pretend all is normal,” New Covenant believers can answer calmly: We already know it isn’t normal. We also know that the remedy is not another round of fear-driven loyalty tests. The remedy is Christ Himself—already given, already sufficient, already enough.

The world is messy. The gospel is not. Stop selling fear. Start living freedom.

The Armstrongist Mini-Torah Doing an End-Run Around the Law

Sukkah (Booth) at Neot Kedumim Park, Israel (Fair Use)



The Armstrongist Mini-Torah

Doing an End-Run Around the Law

By Scout

 

Jesus in that sermon (Sermon on the Mount) said He did not come to destroy the Law or the prophets. He came only to fulfill. And I've shown you that according to the New Testament in James that we are commanded to fulfill the Law following in His steps — He set us an example that we should follow His steps and we too must fulfill the Law or else we are sinners and love is the fulfilling of the Law. And He said that not the dotting of an "i" or the crossing of a "t" would be removed from the Law until everyone is really fulfilling it.  Herbert W. Armstrong, “Spirit of the Law”, Sermon, 1979

 

Cult theology can become a comedy of errors.  When I was at the Big Sandy Feast site one year, back in the Seventies, I heard someone criticize Ambassador College faculty members and administrators who lived on Faculty Row for not moving into a temporary dwelling for the duration of the Feast of Tabernacles.  Some people on Faculty Row did have their kids living in tents in the backyard. It was funny, because I think the critic was probably living in one of the nearby hotels or a sleek tent in Piney Woods. He probably felt that he was in the right because his residence was temporary, for him at least, but he conveniently overlooked the other characteristics of the prescribed suka (Hebrew) for the Feast of Tabernacles. From the name of this holy day alone, we know that the suka occupied a central role in the liturgy for this observance. 

The Torah is explicit about what qualifies as a temporary dwelling for Sukkot. But there is a discrepancy between the inspired scripture in the Old Testament and the modern-day re-imagining of the Torah by Armstrongists.  The Armstrongist version of the Torah is smaller and in some cases not as demanding.  As in the case of the suka.  This reduction of the Torah seems to be out of rhyme with Herbert W. Armstrong’s (HWA) statement above that speaks of keeping the Torah, the same law Jesus kept, down to the jot and tittle.  The Armstrongist rendition of the Torah could be called a Torah Lite, but I prefer mini-Torah.  The suka case needs to be examined further. 

The Case of Suka at the Feast of Tabernacles

Herbert W. Armstrong was always an advocate of letting the Bible interpret itself. So, I will do that in this case. The word suka, translated as booths, means “thicket”. It definitely has an arboreal connotation. In Nehemiah 8:13-15, we find this statement:

On the second day the heads of ancestral houses of all the people, with the priests and the Levites, came together to Ezra the scribe in order to study the words of the law. And they found written in the law which the LORD had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month: And that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying, Go forth unto the mount, and fetch olive branches, and pine branches, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, TO MAKE BOOTHS (SUKA), AS IT IS WRITTEN.

It is clear that this refers to brush arbors. This is how Ezra and the august body of authorities read the scripture.  Why should we read the passage differently? This dwelling is something that you make yourself with your own hands, is temporary (That is, the suka is temporary, not your dwelling there.  It wasn’t there before Sukkot, and it will go away after Sukkot), and for the express purpose of observing Sukkot. A hotel room does not fit this profile in the least. The people who dwell in hotels, motels, and rented houses for the FoT, do not comply with the Torah at the jot and tittle level that HWA says is required. Re-read his statement above..

In fact, the Torah on this issue will never be observed among Armstrongists. Can you imagine what would happen if an Armstrongist minister told his wife that she is going to help make a brush arbor and live in it for eight days? You would see a mass exodus from the Armstrongist denominations. It would be a problem that no amount of second tithe could fix. The brush arbor is in the inspired Torah in the Tanakh. A swank hotel room is in the uninspired mini-Torah used by Armstrongists. Because of this departure from the Torah-prescribed brush arbor, nobody in the Armstrongist realm actually observes the Torahic Feast of Booths even though in Armstrongist theology the Torah is written on the hearts of all true Christians.

The lowly brush arbor seems to be without esteem among modernists but Dr. Eitan Bar said the following of it:

The practice of building and living in sukkot—simple structures crafted from branches and foliage—carries profound symbolic meaning. It brings to life the reality of human frailty and transience, reinforcing the truth that ultimate security is found not in human achievements but in God's enduring care. Sukkot is a festival of sensory richness. The waving of the "Four Species" (etrog, lulav, myrtle, and willow) during prayer symbolizes unity and the blessings of creation. The festive meals shared under the open sky, the storytelling, the songs—all foster a deep sense of community, humility, joy, and gratitude. It is a festival where theology becomes tactile, where faith is not merely professed but lived and experienced.

Staying at an expensively appointed hotel for eight days just doesn’t do the same thing. 

The Torah Cannot Really be Miniaturized 

After the Destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, the Torah, which was Temple-dependent, was repackaged by Yohanan ben Zakkai, a prominent Pharisee, along with the sages of the Academy of Jamnia, to function without a Temple.  This was the beginning of Rabbinic Judaism practiced in the synagogue system.  The only other repackaging of the Torah that I know of has been the repackaging done by Armstrongists.  While ben Zakkai had the authority of the Bet Din behind his effort, the Armstrongists seem to have not hearkened to any authority.  Armstrongists might say that their authority is simply the Bible.  But it is not clear that there is a scriptural authority that justifies either the Rabbinic or Armstrongist repackaging.  

And Paul and Moses put a great obstacle before those who would edit and streamline the Torah.  Paul stated in Galatians 5:3, “Once again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the entire law.”  You cannot do just part of the Torah.  It functions like a unit, an operational whole. It cannot be downsized into a “more manageable” package.   Moses said in Deuteronomy 12:32, “You must diligently observe everything that I command you; do not add to it or take anything from it.”   The Torah may have had multiple sources, but the claim of scripture is that Deuteronomy 12:32 encompasses the holy days.  My guess is that sometime in the post-exilic period the Law, Prophets and Psalms were essentially frozen and later Jesus had no trouble referring to them as having authority.  The Tanakh became a recognized and stable body of writing.

I have no history of how the Armstrongists packaged the Torah and recast it as their denominational mini-Torah.  Maybe change accreted through a case-by-case resolution of issues that naturally emerged over the history of the Worldwide Church of God.  Maybe nobody in the Armstrongist camp really ever set out to rewrite the Torah.    

Level of Observance

A potential argument is that a hotel room in a high-end hotel is not the same as but is functionally similar to a suka.  It is a place to live for a while. To start with the concept of a suka from scripture and arrive at the concept of a hotel room just requires disregarding a “few irrelevancies” listed in scripture – like brush, like the temporary status of the structure, the fact that it is hand-made and that kind of thing.  Hence, the Torahic requirement is not abandoned; it is just practiced at a different, less stringent level of observance.  This argument should not have traction among Armstrongists broadly.  Armstrongists generally believe that Jesus defined the Torah for their keeping at the jot and tittle level.  The example that Jesus set living under the Law is their example for Christian living today.  And the Sermon on the Mount made the Torah even more stringent, not less so.  And Armstrongists assert that the Holy Spirit makes it possible for them to keep the Torah when the ancient Israelites could not.  And the Holy Spirit is not in their lives to abbreviate Torah-keeping but to expand it.  So, the idea that replacing the suka with a hotel room at a top-drawer hotel is just an insignificant matter of observance level is a dog that won’t hunt. 

Conclusion

The Torah was the national charter for a certain group of people at a certain time and a certain place.   It defined the way to live a good and Godly life on this planet on the pathway to Sheol. It was an effective means to a desirable end. But the New Covenant is a covenant of better promises. It is not about living in a suka unless you just want to as a learning experience.  It is about salvation by grace through faith. And sleeping in a suka (or a posh hotel room at the Feast of Tabernacles) won’t make you a Christian any more than sleeping in a garage will make you a car.  

 

 

 



Sunday, August 16, 2026

COG Veritas: Rick Shabi's Son Keeps His Dad's Promise (Updated)



Updated with the missing end post "End Time Readiness — Loving the Truth & Discernment" Link to Rick Shabi Memorial Site

COG Veritas writes:

The Rick Shabi tenure as leader in UCG ended with a lot of confusion. Many members liked him, but chalked it up to "Politics". Home Office was not transparent on the issues that led to Mr. Shabi's departure. 
 
"He was hard on the Home Office Staff" was a common refrain.
Remember, UCG's home office Ministry wants their Ego's stroked and to stay in their comfort zone. Accountability is not a high priority.
We were going to write an article on Rick Shabi, but his son did us a favor.
Rick Shabi believed in Fiscal responsibility. We have heard 2nd hand that the costs to produce a Beyond Today episodes by Peter Eddington and Darris McNeely and that crew were significant. If someone knows Peter Eddington, ask him the cost to produce each episode and post it here. (Is it North of $100,000 per episode?).
Rick Shabi produced a podcast that was a fraction of the cost and had more followers. Would this produce jealousy?
We are aware of a situation that got out of hand involving Steve Meyers. He refused to meet Face to Face with the members who repeatedly requested a meeting. Mark Welch, Vic Kubik, and Darris McNeely did nothing to deal with Steve Meyers or require him to have a meeting. They looked the other way.
Rick Shabi at least forced Steve Meyers to meet with the brethren where he was exposed as Incompetent, lying, and a fraud.
So, Rick Shabi was willing to make the Home Office Ministers have the hard conversation with the members when they made a mistake, in this instance.
In his son's words, here is what went down at the end of Rick Shabi's tenure.

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

Keeping a Promise

Today marks the one-year anniversary of my father’s death, closing out a year that has felt like a heavy blur of grief and reflection. I have always preferred to remain quiet, keep my focus on my family and move forward. However, given the impact of the recent General Conference of Elders’ (GCE) tribute on my family, it became clear that silence isn’t an option when the truth is not faithfully represented.

Seeing the GCE printed booklet was a painful catalyst, forcing the realization that quiet restraint was no longer an option. After I presented my father’s records to the Council of Elders earlier in the year and received their formal response, I had begun to resign myself to letting the matter go—accepting that administrative channels for review were closed and trying to focus instead on honoring my father’s memory through this website. While I always intended to write something to mark the one-year anniversary of my father’s death, this message would have looked far different had that misleading tribute not been published in their official record. Seeing an alternate narrative printed for the entire Church made it clear that our silence was being used against us—and with my father no longer here to defend himself, I realized that if his true account was ever to be known, I had to speak on his behalf.

My family initially kept our heartache private, hoping prayer, time and thoughtful dialogue would bring peace. However, our silence allowed a convenient narrative to take hold—one that risks framing my father’s presidency, his exit, and his final warnings through the lens of personal conflict rather than his unwavering commitment to biblical principle. Standing for the truth requires setting the record straight, ensuring history is remembered accurately, and fulfilling my promise to him.

There is a literary concept which has stuck with me, which is that a person dies twice. The first is physical, but the second happens when their true story is erased, replaced with a false narrative, and eventually forgotten. While that second fading usually takes generations, here it is happening less than a year after my father’s death. To ensure his true legacy is preserved, and his memory and true experiences are not lost so soon, I am choosing to honor two promises I made to my father in his final days: first, to keep his messages permanently and publicly available, and second, to bring the truth of what he endured in secret into the light.

This second promise grew directly out of the tragic timing of my father’s death. Throughout June 2025, my father carried a crushing spiritual burden. In his original resignation letter, he spoke openly of the “literal lies and betrayal” he had witnessed and experienced—a pain compounded as he realized that church leadership’s promises about his returning to pastoring in Orlando were empty, and that the church organization was moving down a path he viewed as deeply alarming. This unresolved distress took a heavy physical and emotional toll on him and never left his mind, even during our family cruise. Tragically, he suffered a sudden, fatal heart attack just one week after we returned, leaving him no opportunity to share what had happened with the brethren or address it publicly. During his final days in the hospital, knowing the time was short, he asked me to eventually bring the things that happened secretly into the light, if possible, realizing it would be incredibly difficult because he had struggled deeply with how to approach it himself.

Even though many of these events happened a year ago, the spirit behind them remains today.



Spiritual Cancer —
Preserving the True Record


The public statement made at the recent 2026 General Conference of Elders (GCE) was difficult for our family to hear, as it did not reflect the reality of his final months. First and foremost, my father was explicit with us before he died that he did not want a tribute presented to him at the 2026 GCE or any future conference.

There is a clear distinction between the public narrative and the private reality. Praising my father from the pulpit while quietly setting aside his final warnings creates the very condition he warned against in his sermon, Spiritual Cancer—where institutional appearances are maintained while foundational principles are quietly set aside.

While some are aware that my father stepped down shortly before the conclusion of his presidential term, many do not know the biblical convictions that guided his decision. In his original resignation letter, he explained that continuing his active participation as president would make it appear as though he condoned an environment incompatible with God’s standards of Christian leadership. He wrote that he had to follow his conscience, choosing to "obey God rather than men." For this exact reason, he asked my mother and me to ensure his wishes were honored—specifically to avoid having his story reshaped into a more convenient narrative.

Despite his explicit request, the Council and administration (church leadership) moved forward with a tribute for my father without consulting our family. In the official GCE booklet, they printed an alternate story, stating that my father passed away "just months after completing his presidential term" and "while looking forward to resuming his service in the pastoral ministry" in Orlando.

Neither statement reflects the documented reality, as the official narrative leaves out two critical facts:

The reality of my father’s exit: Stating that my father simply “completed his presidential term” attempts to erase his formal resignation and to alter what he stood for in his final days. He did not quietly finish his time in office and ride off into a contented retirement. We wish that had been the case. Instead, he felt it necessary to take a definitive, documented moral stand against the direction and conduct within church leadership—specifically resigning early and choosing not to participate in the 30th Anniversary GCE celebration so as not to appear to condone what had occurred. By omitting his April 27th resignation, the official account reframed a profound act of biblical conscience into a standard administrative transition.


His pastor’s heart and desire to serve: My father never viewed the presidency as a status symbol. His true heart was always that of a pastor. In both of his resignation letters, my father made it clear that stepping down as president was not a resignation from the ministry. He affirmed his commitment to serve the brethren and stated his clear desire to pastor in Orlando following the local pastor's retirement, writing in his May 1st resignation letter that this was “for the record.” He simply wanted to spend his remaining years serving the local congregation he loved.

Instead, my father died with the firm, painful knowledge that he would never be permitted to pastor in Orlando again. While still president, he learned that other individuals were already being contacted to fill that exact role—a reality later confirmed in a conversation my mother overheard when Chairman Tim Pebworth noted that “under normal circumstances” a former president would naturally have the option to return to pastoring. While leadership publicly presented the image of a peaceful, seamless transition to the church, my father was left with the realization that behind closed doors, his situation was being treated as abnormal. Carrying the heavy weight of that reality, my father never attempted to defend himself publicly, choosing instead self-control over self-defense.



Are You Living by Every Word?
Unwavering Urgency


The current direction of the church as described in recent public Council reports stands in clear contrast to the principles my father lived and taught—marking a direction the church has never taken before. As president, my father operated with an absolute urgency to preach the gospel, holding a firm conviction that God’s resources should be actively invested into the work today. Historically, tithe funds have been protected from market risk and investment speculation, reserved instead for immediate use in preaching the gospel. However, recent official reports highlight an administrative shift that has allocated millions of dollars of tithes into long-term investments. While the stated goal is to protect the organization’s assets for the future, placing security in long-term financial accumulation risks replacing immediate, active faith with human reasoning and physical safety.

Long before these financial strategy shifts were made public, my father warned that institutional self-preservation runs counter to God’s calling. In Our Collective Part in Advancing the Mission, my father reminded the church that “God’s will is that His Church moves forward… He never called us to be status quo,” cautioning against allowing a desire for physical security to distract from the work at hand. Relying on the stability of a fragile economic system undermines the core call to preach with true urgency about the end of the age and the coming Kingdom of God. As my father warned in Are You Living by Every Word (Carefully, Diligently, Willingly, Now), financial accumulation can create a false sense of security that obscures how rapidly events can unfold:

“Suddenly is going to come suddenly… any morning we could wake up and life as we have known it has changed. The economy could fall. It is that perilous. It is a bulge in the wall, just willing, just ready to break.”Are You Living by Every Word? (Carefully, Diligently, Willingly, Now)—Rick Shabi, March 16, 2024

This financial shift stands in clear contrast to the example my father set even in his final hours. Though none of us expected him to die so suddenly, he shared with us in that hospital room that he was completely at peace, precisely because he had lived and served with unwavering urgency, holding nothing back from what he believed God required of him.

If my father had prioritized long-term material security or personal comfort over immediate faith, his final days and the legacy he left behind would have been entirely different. The true danger of the church’s financial shift is not merely where tithes are placed, but the subtle spiritual decay that institutional mindset can create within us. When the leadership of a church begins relying on long-term financial accumulation rather than immediate faith, that same lack of urgency can quietly creep into our own personal lives. My father’s example leaves us with a sobering question for our own lives—when our time eventually comes, will we be able to face it with that same absolute peace? The answer depends on whether we choose to place our trust in physical security today, or in fully surrendering our lives and resources to God’s work.

The Danger of Politics —
A Warning Fulfilled


At the beginning of his presidency, my father established his personal boundary plainly— “I don’t play politics, I don’t respond to politics because I don’t like it, I don’t like what it does. I’ve seen it firsthand.” In that same sermon, The Danger of Politics, he warned the church how easily corporate mindsets can infiltrate the church and spiritual leadership, noting that “politics is a dangerous thing... it leads to destruction, politics leads to strife, politics leads to death,” noting that its root cause is simple — “it’s about self, it’s about what I want… who I favor.” He explicitly cautioned:

“Political maneuverings in a church or anyplace else… lead to factions that can develop and that can lead to decisions that can be hurtful and painful to others.” The Danger of Politics (Sermon)—Rick Shabi, November 5, 2022

Looking back at his private records today, those words carry remarkable foresight regarding the very environment he later encountered at the Home Office. As the executor of my father’s estate, I began organizing his personal records earlier this year and cataloging his physical and digital files. What I found were not casual notes, but official written communications, timelines, and primary documents detailing the severe, ongoing opposition he experienced behind closed doors throughout the spring of 2025—an environment marked by resistance to his leadership, disrespect, bitter jealousy, and direct hostility from leadership.

Some have asked whether the resistance my father faced was simply a clash of personalities. In his original resignation letter, my father addressed the severe environment behind closed doors, recording his perspective that the ongoing disruption was “to remove and discredit me.” His private archive contains both his comprehensive April 27th resignation detailing these institutional and spiritual concerns, as well as the brief, sanitized May 1st version he was pressured to submit four days later—a compromise he agreed to out of a personal commitment to obey Christ’s command to reconcile with an adversary along the way (Luke 12:58). In reality, the Council voted to end his presidency because his presence stood as an unyielding barrier to institutional compromise, political maneuvering, and centralized administrative control. Removing him marked a turning point for the fundamental shift in governance and church resources that we are beginning to witness today. While his private archive contains extensive documentation regarding the administrative environment he went through, my goal is not to engage in conflict, but rather to honor my father’s consistent call for biblical integrity.

To ensure proper spiritual counsel and biblical wisdom were followed, these records were independently reviewed and verified by a group of elders. Their evaluation reached the same conclusion—my father’s documented records stand in direct contrast to the public accounts presented by leadership. This documentation reveals a stable presidency suddenly disrupted by unverified private claims. My father spoke out because he believed the church was facing a defining “now I know” test, referencing God’s words to Abraham after he showed his willingness to obey. My father felt church leadership was at a similar crossroads where God was examining their true hearts, facing a choice that would permanently define the church’s trajectory.

The Deceptive Heart —
A Need for Biblical Transparency


Near the end of his presidency, my father delivered a sermon titled The Deceptive Heart, reminding the church how easily human reasoning can trick believers and leaders into compromising God’s standards: 

“They watered down what He [God] said and somehow, they’ve convinced themselves that’s okay. It’s not okay.” Drawing from Galatians 5, he highlighted the spiritual danger of prioritizing personal or organizational self-preservation over God’s truth, noting that deception often manifests as “a self-willed opinion… which is substituted for submission to the power of Truth, and that leads to division.” The Deceptive Heart (Sermon)—Rick Shabi, February 22, 2025

I brought my father’s records directly to the Council to give them a complete, transparent picture, sharing the heavy burden my father carried in his final months hoping some sort of open dialogue could occur. I hoped the Council would review these matters with pastoral care and work toward resolution and peace for our family.

Instead, I received a formal response from Chairman Tim Pebworth on behalf of the Council of Elders. While the letter opened with condolences, the primary focus centered on our family’s grief rather than the documented timelines I had presented, leaving the evidence, records, and contradictions surrounding my father’s final months unaddressed.

Rather than addressing the substance of the documents or even acknowledging sorrow for how my father felt in his final days, the Council focused on the tone of my request—characterizing a call for transparency as “the language of ultimatum” and stating they were “collectively saddened—not angered, but genuinely saddened” by my approach. They declined my proposed terms, asserting that these matters must“remain in private channels” under the framework of Matthew 18.

In practice, keeping these records exclusively within private channels prevented any broader organizational review. When I inquired about an independent review, it became clear that no governing body—including the General Conference of Elders—was designated to receive or act upon such findings, leaving no structural channel for impartial evaluation or accountability for church leadership.

Ultimately, rather than engaging with the documented records, the Council conditioned any future discussion on a process “free from public pressure” and “performative urgency” that they felt “forecloses the very space for genuine reconciliation.” But asking for truth and transparency regarding a father and former president’s final weeks in office is not “performative urgency”—it is basic Biblical Accountability. My requests to the Council were straightforward—acknowledge or explain the documented contradictions and share the facts with the GCE, the body their own governing documents define as the ultimate human authority.

As Jesus Christ made clear in John 3:21,

“He who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen.”

Truth naturally welcomes the light, whereas incomplete narratives rely on restricted access. Choosing to keep the documented records within closed channels leaves the brethren to discern their own conclusions for themselves.

Reflecting on this outcome reveals a persistent pattern. In his resignation letter, my father recorded that when he submitted his formal March 16th warning letter—outlining key concerns regarding church governance and administrative direction—directly to the Council and Ethics Committee, his warning was met with complete silence, despite his earnest efforts to follow the scriptural order of Matthew 18. A year later, when I presented his documented archive, the Council provided a formal response, yet the core contradictions remained unaddressed. A full year has passed, but the spirit behind that response remains completely unchanged.


The Allegory of the Cave

In the final month before my father’s sudden heart attack, he spoke with me at length about Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. We talked about it right before our family cruise to Greece, which had led him to reflect on ancient history, language, and how patterns of human behavior repeat themselves all through Scripture, from Joseph and David to the prophets and Jesus Christ Himself.

The allegory describes a group of prisoners chained inside a dark cave, facing a blank wall. For their entire lives, they watch artificial shadows cast across the wall by handlers or puppeteers, mistaking those illusions for reality. When one prisoner is finally freed and forced outside into the true light of the sun, he is initially overwhelmed but eventually sees the world as it truly is—beautiful and full of truth. However, when he returns to the cave to share that truth out of love and a desire to free the others, he is ridiculed and rejected. The prisoners prefer the comfort of the familiar shadows over the light, becoming defensive and even violent if forced to face reality.

My father wrestled deeply with why God had allowed him to witness what he saw during his presidency. Looking back, I realize he was using this concept to process his own grief. He saw a timeless biblical parallel—the same struggle early Christians faced as they had to step out from the religious cave of the Pharisees to find true light and transformation. Having stepped into the leadership of the church, he witnessed firsthand the painful difference between what was told to the brethren publicly and what was happening in secret. He found that simply trying to speak the truth was met with immediate resistance.

“Once a person’s eyes have adjusted to the light of uncompromised truth, it becomes spiritually impossible to remain in the shadows of self-deception or to pretend that human control can ever take the place of God’s truth.” Rick Shabi—June 16, 2025



End Time Readiness —
Loving the Truth & Discernment

The true weight of these patterns came into sharp focus on July 19, 2025, when my father delivered what would be the final sermon in his physical life: End Time Readiness: Loving the Truth and Spirit of Discernment. While spiritual discernment is often viewed by many as a safeguard against external influences, my father’s focus was centered on a subtle and more serious concern—the danger of spiritual compromise arising from within the church.

My father shared with my mother, wife, and me that throughout his presidency, his sermons reflected what he was experiencing and what was happening to him in secret. At times, following prayer, he felt moved to change his planned sermons, even when facing opposition from church leadership over their content. It was only later that the tragic reality would surface—the spiritual warnings my father felt moved to deliver were a mirror-image exposure of the very administrative maneuvers transpiring against him in secret.

In what would be his final sermon to the church, my father spoke from the heart to equip the church with essential principles for spiritual discernment. Midway through his sermon, he turned his focus toward the internal condition of those in spiritual authority, reminding the membership that spiritual compromise within leadership rarely presents itself openly. Instead, it enters quietly through gradual, subtle shifts that require deep spiritual vigilance to recognize.

"And it could be that even in our lives, right in the church, sometimes it isn't a lie as in, you know, a blatant lie that we would all say is absolutely wrong. But there can be a twist here or a twist there or you see something that's not quite right. And what does that mean? We live by the word of God. You know, Paul as he was talking to the elders of Ephesus, he warned them in Acts 20 that even from among you, some will come in and they will teach perverse things. But it really is misleading things is the correct translation there. You don't have to do that. That doesn't apply here.'" End Time Readiness—Loving the Truth and Spiritual Discernment (Sermon), Rick Shabi, July 19, 2025

He was exposing an institutional mindset that risks prioritizing institutional convenience over scriptural righteousness. To help the church navigate such an environment, he provided a vital key of spiritual discernment, drawing directly from the account of Isaac in Genesis: “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. Something’s not right here. If it doesn’t seem right, just do a little more investigation. Seek the truth.” When Isaac was old and his sight failed, he sensed that something was wrong, yet he moved forward anyway, wanting to believe the illusion so he wouldn’t have to face a harsher reality. My father warned us never to fall into that same spiritual trap.

Following my father’s death, these very spiritual principles became strikingly relevant. The nice, polished GCE tribute presented a reassuring, unified message—the comforting “voice of Jacob” meant to signal peace across the church. But as my father urged us, true discernment requires examining the “hands of Esau”—the actual actions taking place behind the scenes.

A direct review of the official YouTube channel reveals media actions taken regarding my father’s final warning messages. Key sermons, including The Deceptive Heart, Spiritual Cancer, and Our Collective Part in Advancing the Mission, were changed from public status to ‘unlisted,’ removing them from public search results and main channel visibility. Regardless of whether these specific messages are currently hidden or have been selectively restored to public view by the time you read this, the underlying objective remains apparent.

End Time Readiness —
Loving the Truth & Discernment

The true weight of these patterns came into sharp focus on July 19, 2025, when my father delivered what would be the final sermon in his physical life: End Time Readiness: Loving the Truth and Spirit of Discernment. While spiritual discernment is often viewed by many as a safeguard against external influences, my father’s focus was centered on a subtle and more serious concern—the danger of spiritual compromise arising from within the church.  

My father shared with my mother, wife, and me that throughout his presidency, his sermons reflected what he was experiencing and what was happening to him in secret. At times, following prayer, he felt moved to change his planned sermons, even when facing opposition from church leadership over their content. It was only later that the tragic reality would surface—the spiritual warnings my father felt moved to deliver were a mirror-image exposure of the very administrative maneuvers transpiring against him in secret.

In what would be his final sermon to the church, my father spoke from the heart to equip the church with essential principles for spiritual discernment. Midway through his sermon, he turned his focus toward the internal condition of those in spiritual authority, reminding the membership that spiritual compromise within leadership rarely presents itself openly. Instead, it enters quietly through gradual, subtle shifts that require deep spiritual vigilance to recognize.

"And it could be that even in our lives, right in the church, sometimes it isn't a lie as in, you know, a blatant lie that we would all say is absolutely wrong. But there can be a twist here or a twist there or you see something that's not quite right. And what does that mean? We live by the word of God. You know, Paul as he was talking to the elders of Ephesus, he warned them in Acts 20 that even from among you, some will come in and they will teach perverse things. But it really is misleading things is the correct translation there. You don't have to do that. That doesn't apply here.'"

End Time Readiness—Loving the Truth and Spiritual Discernment (Sermon), Rick Shabi, July 19, 2025

He was exposing an institutional mindset that risks prioritizing institutional convenience over scriptural righteousness. To help the church navigate such an environment, he provided a vital key of spiritual discernment, drawing directly from the account of Isaac in Genesis: “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. Something’s not right here. If it doesn’t seem right, just do a little more investigation. Seek the truth.” When Isaac was old and his sight failed, he sensed that something was wrong, yet he moved forward anyway, wanting to believe the illusion so he wouldn’t have to face a harsher reality. My father warned us never to fall into that same spiritual trap.

Following my father’s death, these very spiritual principles became strikingly relevant. The nice, polished GCE tribute presented a reassuring, unified message—the comforting “voice of Jacob” meant to signal peace across the church. But as my father urged us, true discernment requires examining the “hands of Esau”—the actual actions taking place behind the scenes.

A direct review of the official YouTube channel reveals media actions taken regarding my father’s final warning messages. Key sermons, including The Deceptive Heart, Spiritual Cancer, and Our Collective Part in Advancing the Mission, were changed from public status to ‘unlisted,’ removing them from public search results and main channel visibility. Regardless of whether these specific messages are currently hidden or have been selectively restored to public view by the time you read this, the underlying objective remains apparent.


Figures 1-3 show this pattern - Official YouTube player settings for "Spiritual Cancer," "The Deceptive Heart," and "Our Collective Part in Advancing the Mission," showing 'Unlisted' status on the official United Church of God channel.

This pattern extends even to his final sermon, End Time Readiness, which was made available solely as an audio file on the church website, while several of his Biblical Worldview messages were removed. My father did not preach to earn institutional approval or applause but preached with end-time urgency because he genuinely cared for the spiritual welfare of the brethren. Seeing his final warning messages placed on 'unlisted' status or restricted from public search feeds does not diminish their truth. The character of a faithful shepherd is revealed in his willingness to preach uncompromised truth even when it becomes uncomfortable, and ensuring those messages remain publicly accessible allows his living work to continue serving the Church.