Semi-Arianism, Arianism, and Armstrongism

Semi-Arianism was a 4th-century Christian theological position that emerged during the intense debates over the nature of Christ following the First Council of Nicaea (325 AD). It represented a deliberate middle-ground attempt to modify the stricter teachings of Arianism while still firmly rejecting the full Nicene doctrine of the Trinity.

Core of Arianism (for context)

Arius (c. 250–336 AD) taught that God the Father alone is uncreated and eternal. The Son (Jesus/Christ) was the first and highest created being—begotten by the Father at some point in time (“there was [a time] when he was not”), not co-eternal, of a different substance (heteroousios), and subordinate/inferior to the Father. The Holy Spirit was even lower in the hierarchy.

What Semi-Arianism changed

Semi-Arians (also called Homoiousians) rejected the most extreme Arian claims. They affirmed that:

• The Son was not a creature made out of nothing.
• The Son was begotten (eternally generated) by the Father and existed before the world.
• The Son was fully divine in a real sense and “of similar substance” (homoiousios) with the Father—very close, but not identical in essence (homoousios, “same substance” or “consubstantial”).
• The Son was still subordinate to the Father in rank or authority.

They often viewed the Holy Spirit as subordinate or even an impersonal created force rather than a co-equal divine Person. The position was politically influential for a time but was ultimately condemned as heretical by the orthodox (Nicene) party at councils like Constantinople (381 AD).

Armstrong’s teaching on God (the “God Family” or binitarianism)

Armstrong rejected the Trinity as a pagan, unbiblical doctrine invented centuries after the apostles. Instead:

• God is a family or kingdom of divine spirit beings, currently consisting of two co-eternal Persons: God the Father (supreme) and the pre-existent Word/Logos (who became Jesus Christ).

• Both the Father and the Son are fully divine, uncreated, and composed of the same kind of divine “spirit essence” or “God-kind” substance.

• They are two distinct beings/persons, not one essence in three Persons. The Father is greater in authority; the Son is subordinate yet shares the divine family nature.

• The Holy Spirit is not a third Person or co-equal member of the Godhead. It is the impersonal power, mind, essence, or active force of God.

• Humans who repent, accept Christ, and endure in obedience can ultimately be born again as literal spirit children of God—added to the divine family and becoming “God beings” themselves (though the Father remains supreme).

This is classically described as binitarianism (two Persons in the Godhead), though Armstrong extended it into a dynamic, expanding “God Family.”

How Armstrongism Relates

Armstrongism is not strict Arianism, because it explicitly denies that Christ was created and affirms His full divinity and pre-existence. However, it is a clear modern expression of Semi-Arian Christology packaged within a robust binitarian framework. It mirrors the ancient Semi-Arian emphasis on “similar (but not identical) divine substance,” the eternal begetting of the Son, subordination of the Son to the Father, and an impersonal Holy Spirit. Armstrong’s unique addition—the expanding “God Family” in which humans become literal God beings—goes beyond the 4th-century views but rests on the same foundational rejection of Nicene consubstantiality.

Conclusion

In the final analysis, Semi-Arianism, Arianism, and binitarianism—all non-Trinitarian systems—embody the same fatal refusal: they categorically reject the biblical and historic truth that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons sharing the identical divine substance. Armstrongism represents the most aggressive and successful 20th-century resurrection of this ancient error. It is no daring “restoration” of suppressed apostolic truth, but a slick, radio-era repackaging of the very Semi-Arian compromise that the early church thoroughly examined, exposed, and thunderously condemned as heresy at Nicaea and Constantinople.

For those shaped by Armstrongism, this historical connection is devastatingly clear and scripturally damning: the vaunted “God Family” doctrine—with its two separate divine Beings, impersonal Spirit, subordinationist hierarchy, and audacious promise that humans can literally become God beings—is not fresh revelation from God. It is a sophisticated echo of the 4th-century theological poison that subtly yet fatally undermines the full, unqualified deity of the Son and distorts the very nature of the Godhead revealed in Scripture.

The Bible thunders against every form of subordinationism and creaturely reduction of the Son. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made (John 1:3). “For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9). The Father Himself addresses the Son with the words of deity: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever” (Hebrews 1:8, quoting Psalm 45:6). Jesus boldly declared, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), prompting the Jews to seek His death “because you, being a man, make yourself God” (John 10:33) and because He was “making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). Isaiah’s prophecy calls the coming Messiah “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Isaiah 9:6), while Thomas, upon seeing the risen Christ, worshipped Him as “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Paul exults that Christ is “God over all, blessed forever” (Romans 9:5) and “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13).

The Holy Spirit fares no better under such systems. Far from an impersonal force or power, He is fully personal and fully divine. Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit—and Peter declares they lied to God (Acts 5:3-4). We are baptized into the one name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19), and the apostolic benediction places all three on equal footing: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14). To demote the Spirit to an “it” is to contradict the clear witness of Scripture.

The Nicene Creed was not a pagan intrusion or Catholic corruption; it was the church’s necessary, Spirit-led bulwark defending the gospel’s core proclamation of Jesus Christ as “true God from true God,” begotten not made, of one substance with the Father. Armstrongism’s Godhead teaching, no matter how boldly or attractively proclaimed across the airwaves, does not elevate human potential—it diminishes the glory of Christ, grieves the Holy Spirit, robs God of His triune majesty, and leads souls back into the same soul-destroying errors that once threatened to unravel the heart of the Christian faith. Those who cling to it stand not in restored apostolic truth, but squarely in the long, dark shadow of a heresy the undivided early church rightly judged incompatible with Scripture and eternally dangerous to the soul.

The choice remains as stark and urgent today as it was in the fourth century: embrace the full biblical revelation of the triune God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons—or settle for the seductive half-measures of Semi-Arianism dressed in modern clothing. Only the former safeguards the deity of our Savior, the glory of the gospel, and the hope of redemption.

Silent Pilgrim

Armstrongism, Polytheism, Binitarianism, and the Evolving Divine Family

Armstrongism promotes a distinctive “God family” doctrine. God is currently a “family” of two divine Beings — the Father and the pre-incarnate Word (Logos/Jesus) in a binitarian (two-person) view rather than the historic Trinity. Humans who are called, repent, accept Christ, obey God’s laws (including Sabbath, holy days, and dietary rules), and “endure to the end” will ultimately be “born again” as literal spirit beings at the resurrection. They will become God as God is God — full members of the expanding God family, divine in the same sense, capable of creating and ruling like God, while still worshiping the Father as supreme. Armstrong frequently said, “God is reproducing Himself,” drawing from Genesis 1:26 and passages about believers as “children of God” or “heirs,” interpreting them as literal ontological deification into the “God kind.”

Compounding this is a further deviation held by some COG groups (though not the majority or original Armstrong teaching in its strictest form): the pre-incarnate Christ (the Logos/Word) is viewed as a created creature, not originally and eternally God in the full sense. In these circles, the Father alone is the ultimate eternal God, and He created the Logos as the first and highest of His spirit creations (often likened to or preeminent among the angels/sons of God). This created being later became “God” (or the Son) through a process of begetting or elevation, and only then created everything else.

A prominent example is Wade Cox, Coordinator General of the Christian Churches of God (CCG). Cox explicitly teaches a Unitarian/Arian-style Christology: God the Father created Jesus Christ (the pre-incarnate Son) at the same time as all the other angels/sons of God. Jesus has been a “Son of God” since His creation and is of the same created order as the angels, though preeminent among them. Cox states that the Father alone is immortal and the only true God in the full sense; Christ is not God “in any sense that God the Father is God.”

Another example is Ronald Weinland of the Church of God — Preparing for the Kingdom of God (COG-PKG). Weinland teaches that Jesus Christ is not the eternal Yahweh of the Old Testament and was not eternally God. He asserts that Jesus “was not the ETERNAL (Yahweh) of the Old Testament” and emphasizes that when Jesus was in the tomb, “He had no life in Him. He was not eternal! God, His Father, had to raise Him from the dead.” This reflects a view in which the pre-incarnate Christ was created by the Father in the eternal past to serve as God’s agent in creation — a created, exalted being (not co-eternal or fully divine in the same sense as the Father) who was later elevated.

Bob Thiel of the Continuing Church of God (CCOG) holds the classic Armstrongist binitarian view: there are two divine Beings (the Father and the pre-incarnate Son/Word) before the creation of the universe. Thiel strongly affirms that Jesus (the Word) “was God” from the beginning (citing John 1:1) and rejects the idea that Jesus was merely an angel or created out of nothing in the way Jehovah’s Witnesses teach. However, Thiel’s writings and CCOG materials explicitly link this binitarianism to semi-Arianism. They describe their position as consistent with historical semi-Arians, who taught that the Son is “similar” or “of like substance” (homoiousios) with the Father but subordinate — not co-equal and co-eternal in the full Trinitarian sense. CCOG states that Jesus “was always God and forever with the Father, but once begotten, became the Son,” and they defend binitarianism as the original early-Christian view while associating it with semi-Arian history and Sabbath-keeping groups that rejected the Nicene Creed’s homoousios (“same substance”). This subordinationist framework still treats the Father as supreme and the Holy Spirit as non-personal power rather than a co-equal Person.

These teachings (“humans become God” + variations on the nature and origin of Christ) are closely linked in the logic of these groups. If the pre-existent Christ is subordinate, non-eternal in the fullest sense, or follows a path of elevation (whether explicitly created as in Cox/Weinland or begotten/subordinate as in Thiel’s binitarian/semi-Arian view), then it makes sense (in their system) that faithful humans can follow a similar path and be “born” into full Godhood as additional members of the expanding God family.

Why Both Teachings Are Biblically and Theologically Wrong

From the perspective of historic, biblical Christianity (shared across Protestant, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox traditions), these ideas are serious errors that undermine core doctrines of God, Christ, creation, and salvation:

God Is Unique, Eternal, Uncreated, and One in Essence Scripture repeatedly declares that there is only one true God — eternal, self-existent, incomparable, with no beginning and no possibility of “more” Gods being added.

• Isaiah 43:10: “Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.”
• Isaiah 44:6: “I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.”
• 1 Timothy 6:15-16: God alone is immortal and dwells in unapproachable light.

The idea that humans (or even the pre-incarnate Christ in a subordinate/created sense) can cross from creature to full “God as God is God” erases the eternal Creator/creature distinction. Bob Thiel’s binitarianism, which he and CCOG explicitly connect to semi-Arianism, still subordinates the Son and treats divinity as something that can be multiplied into a “God family” — turning biblical monotheism into a form of polytheism or an evolving divine family.

The Full, Eternal Deity of Christ Is Non-Negotiable 

The Bible unequivocally teaches that the pre-incarnate Word (Christ) is eternally God, not a created being who was later elevated or a subordinate “like-substance” Being:

• John 1:1-3, 14: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. … Through him all things were made… The Word became flesh.”
• Colossians 1:15-17: Christ is “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” (supreme, not first-created). “For in him all things were created… He is before all things.”
• Hebrews 1:2-3, 8: The Son is the radiance of God’s glory, the exact representation of His being, addressed as “God” with an eternal throne.
• John 8:58: “Before Abraham was born, I am!”

Views that treat Christ as created (Cox, Weinland) or subordinate/begotten in a semi-Arian sense (Thiel’s binitarianism) deny these clear passages. Only the eternal, fully divine Son could atone for sins against an infinite God.

Salvation Makes Us Like Christ — But Never Equal to or Identical with God 

Believers are adopted as children of God by grace (John 1:12; Romans 8:14-17), conformed to Christ’s image (Romans 8:29), and will be “like him” (1 John 3:2). We will reign with Christ and participate in God’s glory — but always as redeemed creatures worshiping the Creator (Revelation 22:3-4). The “God family” reproduction analogy fails because God has no created “kind” that reproduces into additional Gods.

Connection to Legalism and a Future-Only Salvation 

These errors often accompany an emphasis on law-keeping and “enduring to the end” as co-conditions for ultimate salvation and Godhood, shifting focus from Christ’s finished work (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 3–5).

By blurring the infinite gap between Creator and creature, Armstrongism and its offshoots (whether in the more extreme forms of Wade Cox and Ron Weinland or the semi-Arian-tinged binitarianism of Bob Thiel) open the door to a subtle form of polytheism dressed in Christian language. They replace the awe-inspiring truth of the triune God with a narcissistic fantasy of human deification.

Armstrongism’s teaching that humans will become “God as God is God” is wrong because it violates God’s unique, uncreated oneness, blurs the Creator/creature divide, and over-literalizes adoption language into ontological deification. The related views in some COG groups — including the created/subordinate Christ teachings of Wade Cox and Ronald Weinland, as well as the binitarian framework defended by Bob Thiel of the Continuing Church of God (which explicitly links binitarianism to semi-Arianism) — compound the error: they either deny or significantly weaken Christ’s eternal, co-equal deity, making the Savior a subordinate being rather than the eternal God-man, and logically open the door to humans “becoming God” in the same way. Both ideas ultimately replace worship of the one true, triune God with a vision of an expanding divine family.

The Bible offers something infinitely better: not the empty promise of becoming gods, but the glorious reality of being redeemed children of God, forever enjoying intimate fellowship with the one true, eternal, triune God through the finished work of the eternal Son.

This is not a matter of interpretive preference. It is a matter of truth versus error, of worshiping the Creator rather than aspiring to replace Him. Those who have been influenced by these teachings are urged to examine them honestly against Scripture and turn to the historic, biblical gospel: salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in the eternal Son of God alone — who became man to save us, not to show us how to become gods.

Scripture offers believers something far better and more humbling: eternal life as glorified sons and daughters of God, reigning with Christ, seeing Him face-to-face, and enjoying perfect fellowship with the eternal Creator — forever His people, never His equals. The invitation is simply to trust in the finished work of the eternal Son, Jesus Christ (John 17:3; 1 John 5:11-13).

Silent Pilgrim

Well, That Did Not Take Long - Crackpot Prophet Is Seething Mad! Mad, I Tell You! Mad!

Never in the glorious annals of Church of God history has there been a more delicate, thin-skinned, self-appointed "prophet" than the one currently blessing us with his majestic presence. Truly, it takes almost nothing to send Bwana Bob into a full-blown tizzy—especially when someone has the sheer audacity to call out his endless narcissistic love affair with how spectacularly magnificent he imagines himself to be.

He threw a spectacular tantrum over our last article explaining why the COG no longer needs any prophets—particularly not one who spends his days "correcting" Herbert Armstrong while simultaneously claiming to stand in the great man's shadow. Apparently, pointing out his endless ridiculous claims is just too much for such a fragile ego to bear.

Let’s be perfectly clear: Bwana Bob is not a prophet, never has been, and never will be. His so-called "prophetic utterances" are nothing more than Google headlines poorly reheated and served with a side of self-worship. Any half-competent researcher can find dozens of people saying the exact same things. But of course, only Bob’s version counts as divine revelation. The rest of us are just living in delusion.

For some truly asinine reason, he remains convinced that the only “real” Christians left on planet Earth are the dwindling few trapped inside his little personality cult. Everyone else—especially those meanies at the Banned by HWA blog—are apparently Satan’s personal minions, sent specifically to torment poor, misunderstood Bob.

And that right there is delicious. By obsessively whining about Banned by HWA in post after post, Bwana Bob continually proves just how much we’ve gotten under his skin and how significantly we’ve impacted people’s decisions. Every time he feels compelled to attack us, he’s loudly admitting that we’ve opened the eyes of many to his deception. We’ve helped numerous sincere folks see through the smoke and mirrors, realize they’re being manipulated, and quietly walk away from his nonsense. Our very existence clearly bothers him far more than he’ll ever admit—otherwise he’d simply ignore us like a normal person. But no, he can’t stop talking about us. Thanks for the free advertising, Bob! You sure give us plenty to work with!

He loves to lecture about self-deception, solemnly quoting Revelation 3 about the wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked Laodiceans. The irony is so thick you could spread it on toast. While he’s busy vomiting spiritual judgment on everyone who refuses to bow to his greatness, he remains blissfully unaware that the description fits him like a custom-tailored suit.

It’s painfully obvious, especially when watching his revolving-door congregants in Africa, that there are some genuinely sincere Christians who’ve been duped by his lies and heretical teachings. They’ve fallen victim to the classic false-prophet con: a manipulative man with a Messiah complex who demands total loyalty while offering nothing but ego-stroking nonsense in return. Good, Bible-believing people are having their spiritual lives hijacked and led straight off a cliff—all so Bwana Bob can keep feeling special.

He has hardened his heart so completely that he no longer seems to care how many souls he’s dragging down with him. Instead, he wields the favorite COG insult—“Laodicean!”—like a toddler with a plastic sword, swinging it wildly at anyone who dares disagree. It backfires magnificently every single time.

True Christians have humbled themselves before God for centuries. They follow the actual Jesus—the One who told His followers to deny themselves, take up their cross, and stop seeking the best seats in the synagogue. Bwana Bob, meanwhile, has turned his back on that humble Savior while obsessively demanding everyone keep Old Covenant rules and acknowledge his personal greatness.

His narcissistic personality disorder on full display simply won’t permit actual humility. A man who constantly craves attention, validation, and headlines about himself cannot possibly decrease so that Christ might increase. Instead of pointing people to Jesus, he points them to Bob. Instead of building servants of Christ, he builds devotees of Bob.

In the end, his blinding narcissism has done more than make him a ridiculous figure in COG circles—it has completely severed him from the heart of what it means to follow Christ. While he busily “prophesies” by copying news articles, the real tragedy is that he’s become a living sermon illustration: a warning of what happens when a man’s ego grows so large that even Jesus gets crowded out of the picture.

Keep seething about Banned by HWA, Bob. Every rant just proves we’re doing our job—and doing it well.

Why There Is No Need for Prophets in Armstrongism (Or Why the Church of God Doesn’t Need Another Self-Appointed “Prophet” Every Other Week)

Why There Is No Need for Prophets in Armstrongism

(Or Why the Church of God Has Turned Into a Pathetic Prophet Factory 

for Delusional Narcissists)

Silent Pilgrim

Armstrongism — the restored truths taught by Herbert W. Armstrong and actually held by the "true" Churches of God — has always been brutally clear on one thing: we don’t need prophets today. Not one. Not even a microscopic one. Yet, despite Mr. Armstrong’s repeated, crystal-clear declarations, the Armstrong world has devolved into an open casting call for every self-important, self-deluded spiritual narcissist who wakes up convinced that God is sitting in heaven twiddling His thumbs waiting for their brilliant “revelations.” It’s no longer a serious work — it’s become a ridiculous circus sideshow starring an endless parade of spiritual clowns in ill-fitting prophetic costumes.

Here’s the plain, unfiltered truth:

1. Mr. Armstrong Made It Perfectly Clear — He Wasn’t a Prophet, and Neither Is Anyone Else

Herbert W. Armstrong didn’t mince words. In the February 1972 Tomorrow’s World he flatly declared:

Emphatically I am NOT a prophet… There is no such human prophet living today! The Bible is the written Word of God — and, for our time now, it is COMPLETE!

He called himself an apostle — raised up to restore what had been lost — not some mystic receiving fresh heavenly downloads. But reading comprehension clearly isn’t a strong suit in certain circles. So instead of studying what Mr. Armstrong actually taught, a steady stream of spiritual narcissists crown themselves the next Elijah or God’s personal WhatsApp to the “remnant.” Newsflash: the audition closed decades ago, and none of you made the cut.

2. The Foundation Was Laid Once. Stop Trying to Redig It.

The Church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20). Notice the tense: “was built” — past tense, done deal — not “still under renovation because God left some blanks for you geniuses to fill in.”Mr. Armstrong understood this perfectly. His role was to dust off and proclaim what was already in the Bible, not to play spiritual contractor endlessly pouring fresh concrete on a finished foundation. Yet here we are, endlessly entertained by a circus parade of self-proclaimed prophets insisting God has now given them “new understanding” or “extra revelation.” If Mr. Armstrong’s restored foundation wasn’t good enough for you, maybe stop pretending to be Armstrongist and just admit you’re starting your own private religion.

3. The Bible Is Complete — No “Special Updates” Required

Armstrongism has always taught that the Bible is completely sufficient. Jude 3 says the faith was “once for all delivered.” Revelation 22:18-19 basically threatens plagues on anyone dumb enough to add to it. Mr. Armstrong repeated this truth relentlessly: the Bible is complete for our time.

But that’s apparently too boring for the prophetic crowd. In comes the latest “man of God” with his shiny new dream, conveniently timed vision, or dramatic “Thus saith the Lord” that — surprise, surprise — perfectly supports whatever agenda (and donation appeal) he’s pushing. This isn’t revelation. It’s pure ego in a cheap prophetic Halloween costume. The Bible already equips us for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17). We don’t need your prophetic updates, dreams, or new inspired revelations. The canon is closed. Take your patches and peddle them somewhere else.

4. The Holy Spirit Works Through the Book, Not Through Ego

Every genuinely converted member has the Holy Spirit living inside them. Its actual job is to open our minds to the Scriptures we already have — not to run a 24/7 divine courier service for every puffed-up “prophet” who believes his warm fuzzy feelings outrank the written Word of God.

Mr. Armstrong spent decades warning against following men or chasing new revelation through human leaders. Yet certain segments of Armstrongism still sprint after every new “God told me…” guy like he’s selling spiritual cocaine. They need the drama. They need the secret knowledge. They need to feel special. News flash: the real drama ended when the canon closed. What you’re addicted to now is mostly just ego wearing a fake prophet beard or a polyester suit.

5. The Commission Is to Proclaim the Gospel, Not Wait for the Next “Word from the Lord”

The end-time commission is simple: preach the restored gospel of the Kingdom of God as a witness to all nations (Matthew 24:14) and prepare a people for Christ’s return. That’s already a tall order without turning the Church into an open-mic night for every wannabe Elijah who wants to hijack the Work with his latest “urgent revelation from on high.”

But that’s exactly what keeps happening. Instead of getting the gospel out, too many are busy playing prophecy referee — testing dreams, visions, and increasingly ridiculous declarations. It’s almost as if actually doing what Mr. Armstrong restored isn’t exciting enough. They need constant fresh “special instructions” to keep the adrenaline going. Here’s a radical idea: maybe the Work would move faster if we stopped wasting time babysitting these prophetic clowns and just did the job Christ actually gave us. The commission is to proclaim the finished truth, not to camp out waiting for the next heavenly text message.

Conclusion:

In true Armstrongism, there is no need for prophets today because God has already given us everything we need: His Son as the final revelation, a completed foundation, a sufficient Bible, and His Holy Spirit to guide us through that Bible.Yet the Armstrong scene remains a pathetic, overcrowded clown car stuffed full of wannabe prophets — each one more desperate, more self-important, and more delusional than the last. Take Bob Thiel, the self-anointed “Dr. Bob” who keeps pompously declaring himself a prophet, chasing radio interviews, and bragging about “new doors” while his endless stream of failed predictions and recycled “revelations” pile up like yesterday’s garbage. Or Dave Pack, the Wadsworth date-setting circus ringmaster who has spent years terrorizing his members with one false deadline after another, forcing them to sell everything they own while he quietly moves the goalposts again and again like a con man who never runs out of new excuses.

These modern “prophets” smugly strut around convinced that Mr. Armstrong’s restoration was a tragic failure until they majestically arrived to fix what God supposedly botched. It would be side-splitting comedy if it weren’t so embarrassingly destructive to the very Work they claim to love.

Here’s the cold, hard wake-up call for every self-appointed Elijah still hovering around (especially you, Bob Thiel and Dave Pack): Mr. Armstrong already shut this nonsense down decades ago with zero ambiguity — “There is no such human prophet living today.”

So if you’re still sitting there ignoring the Book while breathlessly awaiting (or delivering) your next glittering “Thus saith the Lord,” do the rest of us a massive favor: hang up the cheap prophetic robe, quit trying to slap your ego-driven fan fiction onto God’s finished masterpiece, and either get with the actual program or get out of the way. The foundation is laid. The Bible is complete. The gospel must go out — without your ridiculous, self-glorifying additions, thank you very much.

That’s not a lack of faith.

That’s simply refusing to let puffed-up pretenders like Bob Thiel and Dave Pack turn God’s completed work into their personal vanity circus and member-exploiting sideshow.

Quote Thiel's failed predictions

Compare to other false prophets

Intensify Pack's exploitation jabs

Think Harder

The 1974 Divine Heist - How to cut back your lifestyle so you can give all your money to the church

 

      Elbert W Harmthrong

Why COG Ministers Are Not Levites

Armstrongite ministers, Worldwide Church of God and its offshoots, are not Levites for several clear biblical, historical, and logical reasons. Some Armstrongite groups or teachings drew parallels between their full-time ministry and the ancient Levitical system—especially regarding receiving tithes without paying them, or serving in a "priestly" role—but this analogy does not hold up under Scripture or facts.

1. Levites Were Defined by Physical, Hereditary Descent from the Tribe of Levi

In the Old Testament, Levites (including the subset of Aaronic priests) were members of one specific Israelite tribe: the descendants of Levi, son of Jacob (Genesis 29:34; Exodus 2:1; Numbers 3:1-10; 18:1-7).

• God set apart the entire tribe of Levi for tabernacle/temple service in place of the firstborn of all Israel (Numbers 3:12-13; 8:14-19).

• Only biological males from this lineage qualified. Physical qualifications applied (e.g., no physical defects for priests—Leviticus 21).

• They had no tribal land inheritance; instead, they received tithes, offerings, and cities among the other tribes (Numbers 18:20-24; Deuteronomy 18:1-2; Joshua 21).

Modern Armstrongite ministers have no verifiable genealogical descent from the tribe of Levi. They come from various ethnic backgrounds (often claiming British or American "Israelite" heritage via British-Israelism, but even that theory does not make them Levites—Levi was one of the tribes that stayed with Judah in the southern kingdom, not "lost"). Armstrongism's British-Israel doctrine itself identifies modern "Israel" as Anglo-Saxon nations, but it does not (and cannot) prove specific Levitical lineages for its ministers.

Without hereditary proof from the tribe of Levi, no one today can biblically claim to be a Levite in the Old Testament sense. Claims of "spiritual Levites" stretch the text beyond its plain meaning.

2. The Levitical Priesthood Was Temporary and Shadowed the Coming Reality in Christ

The entire Levitical system (priesthood, sacrifices, tithes tied to agricultural produce and land) was part of the Old Covenant, which was a shadow or type pointing to Christ (Hebrews 8:1-5; 9:1-10; 10:1).

• Hebrews 7 explains that the Levitical priesthood was weak and imperfect, so God changed it. Jesus became High Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek (not Levi)—a non-hereditary, superior priesthood (Hebrews 7:11-17, 23-28).

• The old system ended with the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. No sacrifices, no temple service, no Levitical roles continue. 

• Armstrong himself acknowledged that Levites do not currently offer sacrifices, yet some teachings still treated modern ministers as receiving tithes "as Levites."

New Testament church leadership (elders/pastors, deacons, etc.) is based on spiritual gifting, calling, character, and appointment—not tribal bloodlines (Ephesians 4:11-12; 1 Timothy 3; Titus 1; 1 Peter 5:1-4). All believers form a "royal priesthood" (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6), not a special ministerial caste modeled on Levi. 

 

3. New Testament Ministry Differs Fundamentally from the Levitical System. 

No tithing command for ministers: The New Testament never commands Christians to tithe to church leaders as a Levitical obligation. Giving is voluntary, cheerful, and proportional (2 Corinthians 9:7; 1 Corinthians 9:7-14—ministers can be supported, but not via the Old Covenant tithe law). Armstrongite practice of ministers receiving tithes (and not paying them) while living at a higher standard directly mirrored the Levitical model, but this imported an obsolete system into the New Covenant.

No hierarchy as a "priesthood" standing between God and people: Some Armstrongite writings promoted a top-down "government of God" with ranks (apostle → evangelist → pastor → elder), likening it to theocratic Levitical rule. Critics inside and outside the movement noted this turned ministers into a mediating priesthood, contrary to the New Testament where Christ is the sole mediator and all believers have direct access to God (1 Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 4:14-16; 1 Peter 2:5, 9).

Early Armstrong himself expressed confusion about church government and initially rejected heavy centralization. Later developments created a pyramidal structure that critics compared (unfavorably) to the Levitical model or even Catholic hierarchy.

4. Practical and Historical Reality

Armstrongite ministers were ordained through laying on of hands within their organization, often trained at Ambassador College—not through Levitical genealogy or Temple service. They functioned as teachers, administrators, and pastors in a modern context, not as temple officiants handling sacrifices, cleansing rituals, or the duties assigned exclusively to Levi (e.g., carrying the ark, specific musical roles in the Temple—1 Chronicles 23-26).

The analogy was largely pragmatic: it justified a full-time paid ministry supported by member tithes in a way that echoed the Old Testament support system for Levites. But equating the two ignores the fundamental shift from Old Covenant shadows to New Covenant reality in Christ.

In summary, Armstrongite ministers are not Levites because:

• Levites required biological descent from Levi.

• The Levitical priesthood was fulfilled and superseded by Jesus' Melchizedek priesthood.

• New Testament ministry operates under grace, spiritual gifts, and voluntary support—not hereditary tribal law or temple ritual.

The parallels drawn in some Armstrongite teachings were an interpretive overlay, not a biblical identity. True Christian service today emphasizes servant leadership for all believers under Christ's headship, without reviving Old Covenant tribal distinctions.

No one needs to tithe to Bob Thiel (Continuing Church of God), Dave Pack (Restored Church of God), Gerald Flurry (Philadelphia Church of God), the United Church of God (UCG), Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA), the Living Church of God (LCG), or any of the other Armstrongite splinter groups.

These leaders and organizations are not biblical Levites. They lack any hereditary descent from the tribe of Levi, and the Old Covenant Levitical system—with its mandatory tithes supporting the priesthood and temple service—has been fulfilled and superseded by Jesus Christ, our High Priest after the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:11-28; 8:13; 10:1-18). The New Testament nowhere commands Christians to give a mandatory 10% (or more, including second and third tithes) to church leaders or organizations. The tithe was part of the temporary Mosaic Law, which included agricultural produce tied to the land of Israel and support for the physical temple system that no longer exists.

Jesus and the apostles taught a completely different approach to giving under the New Covenant. Giving is to be voluntary, cheerful, and proportional—according to how God has blessed and prospered each individual (2 Corinthians 9:6-7; 1 Corinthians 16:2; 2 Corinthians 8:12). It flows from a heart of gratitude and love, not from fear, guilt, pressure, or legalistic obligation. The New Testament emphasizes supporting the work of the gospel, helping the needy, and caring for those who labor in teaching (1 Corinthians 9:7-14; 1 Timothy 5:17-18; Galatians 6:6), but always as freewill offerings, not enforced percentages that can burden families or enrich leaders.

Many of these groups have used tithing teachings to fund ambitious building projects, media efforts, personal luxuries, or unfulfilled prophetic claims, sometimes at the expense of members' financial well-being. Such practices import an obsolete Old Covenant model into the age of grace and turn ministry into a salaried system disconnected from the servant-hearted leadership modeled by Christ and the apostles.

If you want to give money, do so because you have been blessed—not because you are required to meet a quota or fear missing out on God's favor. Give joyfully as an expression of worship and thankfulness for what God has done in your life through Jesus Christ. Let your giving be guided by prayer, conscience, and the leading of the Holy Spirit, whether to help the poor, support genuine gospel work, or bless others directly. God loves a cheerful giver, and He is able to make all grace abound toward you so that you always have sufficiency in everything (2 Corinthians 9:8).

True freedom in Christ means you are no longer under the law but under grace (Romans 6:14). Release any sense of compulsion, and give from a heart overflowing with gratitude for the blessings you have already received. That is the New Testament way.

Silent Pilgrim

The Tithing Lie vs. Joyful Giving

 

Tithing is not a command for Christians under the New Covenant, and the core reason is a fundamental biblical shift from the Old Covenant (Mosaic Law given to ancient Israel) to the New Covenant established by Jesus. This isn't about "doing away with" the whole Old Testament—it's about recognizing what Jesus fulfilled and what applies to the church today. I'll explain the biblical case step by step, then address why Armstrongism (the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong and groups like the original Worldwide Church of God and its splinters) is considered mistaken for treating tithing as a binding requirement.

Tithing in the Old Testament

Under the Mosaic Law, tithing (giving 10% of produce, livestock, etc.) was a specific command for the nation of Israel:

• It supported the Levitical priests and temple system, since the Levites had no land inheritance (Numbers 18:21-24; Leviticus 27:30-33; Deuteronomy 14:22-29; Malachi 3:8-10).

• There were actually multiple tithes in the full system (first for Levites, a second for festivals, a third-year one for the poor), totaling more like 20-23% annually in practice.

• It was part of the civil and ceremonial law tied to Israel's theocracy, priesthood, and temple—not a universal moral law like "do not murder" or "love your neighbor."

This was never presented as a timeless rule for all people everywhere; it was covenant-specific to Israel.

Why the New Covenant changes this

The New Testament teaches that Jesus inaugurated a new covenant that fulfills and replaces the old one (Jeremiah 31:31-34, quoted in Hebrews 8:6-13). The old system—including its priesthood, sacrifices, temple, and associated laws—is now "obsolete" and "ready to disappear" (Hebrews 8:13). 

Key reasons tithing is no longer commanded:

• Believers are not under the Mosaic Law. Romans 6:14-15, Romans 7:4-6, Galatians 3:23-25, and Galatians 5:18 state we died to the law through Christ and now live by the Spirit under grace, not a system of rules. The law was a guardian until Christ came; now we're adopted sons, not slaves to it.

• The priesthood changed, so the supporting laws changed. Hebrews 7:5-12 explicitly discusses tithing: the Levites received tithes "according to the law." But when the priesthood switched from Levi to the order of Melchizedek (fulfilled in Jesus), "the law must be changed also." Jesus is our high priest forever; there's no Levitical system left to support. The entire package tied to it (tithes included) is fulfilled in Him.

• No New Testament command or example of mandatory tithing for the church. The word "tithe" appears in the NT only when Jesus addresses Jews still under the old law (Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42—he rebukes Pharisees for tithing herbs while neglecting justice, but this is pre-cross). After the resurrection, the apostles teach generous, cheerful, proportionate giving instead:"

• Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver" (2 Corinthians 9:7).

• "On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper" (1 Corinthians 16:2).

• Support for ministers is encouraged (1 Corinthians 9:13-14; 1 Timothy 5:17-18), but never as a fixed 10% tax.

Early church practice and most Christian history confirm this. The apostles never imposed a percentage. Giving was voluntary, sacrificial, and Spirit-led (Acts 4:32-37; 2 Corinthians 8-9). The tithe as a legal requirement faded with the old covenant, just like animal sacrifices, circumcision, and food laws.

Many Christians still use 10% as a helpful guideline or starting point for generosity (it's practical and biblical in principle), but it's not obligatory. The NT calls us to more than a legal minimum—generosity from the heart, often exceeding 10% for those who can afford it.

Why Armstrongism is wrong to command tithing

Herbert W. Armstrong (founder of the Worldwide Church of God) taught that tithing (plus a second tithe for festivals and sometimes a third) remains a New Testament command and God's "permanent financing system" for His work. He argued:

• Tithing predates the Mosaic Law (e.g., Abraham to Melchizedek in Genesis 14) and continues under the Melchizedek priesthood of Christ.

• Malachi 3:8-10 ("robbing God") applies directly to modern Christians, bringing curses for non-payment.

• The "law" didn't change in a way that abolishes tithing—it just transferred to the new ministry.

This view is critiqued (even by the later Worldwide Church of God itself after Armstrong's death) for these reasons:

• It misreads Hebrews 7 and covenant theology. Armstrong claimed the priesthood change preserves tithing as law. But the text says the opposite: the change in priesthood requires a change in the law (Hebrews 7:12). The old tithing system was tied to the obsolete Levitical order and is fulfilled, not transferred. The post-Armstrong WCG leadership explicitly corrected this in the 1990s, declaring tithing voluntary, as part of a broader return to mainstream biblical teaching on the New Covenant. This shift caused a financial crisis and massive membership loss precisely because Armstrong had made it central.

• It imposes Old Covenant legalism on the New Covenant church. Armstrong selectively kept certain OT laws (Sabbath, holy days, clean meats, tithing) while claiming the New Covenant. But the NT consistently says we're not under that system (see Galatians 3-5; Colossians 2:16-17). Commanding a percentage under threat of curses or spiritual loss contradicts "not under compulsion" (2 Corinthians 9:7) and turns grace-giving into obligation. Critics (including former members and biblical scholars) note this created heavy financial burdens on members while funding a large organization.

• It doesn't align with the full New Testament witness. Jesus and the apostles never commanded tithing for the church. Treating Malachi 3 as a direct threat to Christians today ignores its original context (post-exile Israel under the old covenant) and the finished work of Christ.

Armstrong's position stems from a particular interpretive lens that prioritizes continuity of Old Testament practices unless explicitly repealed— but this overlooks how the New Testament presents the entire old system as fulfilled and obsolete in Christ. Mainstream Christian theology (across Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox traditions) sees this as a form of legalism that misses the freedom and joy of New Covenant generosity.

The Bible encourages sacrificial, joyful giving to support the church, the poor, and gospel work—without a fixed percentage or threats. If you're wrestling with this personally, the key is prayerful, Spirit-led generosity "as you prosper," not a checklist. Different Christians land on slightly different applications, but the consensus is clear: mandatory tithing is not a New Covenant command.

Tithing is simply not a command for Christians under the New Covenant. The entire Old Covenant system — including its priesthood, temple, and required tithes — was fulfilled and set aside when Jesus became our eternal High Priest in the order of Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:12 is crystal clear: “When the priesthood changes, the law must be changed also.” The New Testament never once commands the church to tithe. Instead, it calls us to generous, cheerful, Spirit-led giving from the heart, without percentage or compulsion (2 Corinthians 9:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2).

Armstrongism’s continued demand for mandatory tithing (including the second and third tithes) is therefore biblically incorrect. It misreads Hebrews 7, treating the priesthood change as a mere transfer of the old law rather than its fulfillment. It revives an obsolete Old Covenant practice and places believers back under a form of legalism the apostles explicitly rejected. By applying Malachi 3:8–10 as a direct threat of curses to Christians today, it contradicts the finished work of Christ and the freedom of the New Covenant. Even the Worldwide Church of God itself later repudiated this teaching and returned to voluntary giving — precisely because it could not be defended from the New Testament.

In the end, insisting on tithing as a binding requirement distorts the gospel of grace. It turns joyful generosity into obligation, burdens God’s people with an outdated system Jesus already fulfilled, and misses the far greater call of the New Testament: to give sacrificially, cheerfully, and “as you prosper,” supporting the church and the needy out of love rather than law.

The Bible’s message is liberating: you are not under the old system. Give freely, give joyfully, and watch God’s grace abound through you. That is the true New Covenant way.

Silent Pilgrim

Crackpot Prophet Says He Is A Better Elijah Than HWA Was Because He Has Restored More Truths

The Church of God Clown Show is in full swing again today, with our resident Crackpot Prophet tooting his itty-bitty horn about how magnificent he is and how he’s revealed truths hidden even from Herbert W. Armstrong. How quickly he forgets: if Herbert were alive today, Crackpot Bob’s ass would’ve been booted out the church door so fast he wouldn’t know what hit him. Even Rod Meredith already kicked him to the curb once for his narcissistic presumptions. Real prophets learn their lesson. Fake, self-appointed ones just keep digging the hole deeper—with no way out.

Crackpot Bob is particularly perturbed that those wild and crazy folks in Edmond, Oklahoma, keep claiming Herbert W. Armstrong restored ALL things. He can’t stand it. According to him, Herbert didn’t restore squat. Only he—the Great Bwana, the Second Elijah—has restored all truth. Truth that poor old Herbert was never privy to. Stand in awe, peasants, of the Magnificent One!

"Malachi 3 continues: “and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? And who shall stand when he appeareth? For he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap” (verses 1-2). … 

 

Herbert W. Armstrong expounded on this prophecy in a landmark sermon on Dec. 17, 1983. “As John the Baptist was the physical messenger in the physical wilderness of Jordan, so there would be a messenger with a message—with a voice crying out in the spiritual wilderness of the modern 20th century,” he said. “Preparing the way for … Jesus to come to His spiritual temple [speaking of the Church] … this time to set up the Kingdom of God and to rule.” 

 

Christ said this Elijah would “restore all things.” Mr. Armstrong then noted, “Now John the Baptist didn’t restore anything. They already knew about the law, and he called them to repentance; but he didn’t have to give them sermons about what all the law is. They knew that. He just called them to repent and turn to another way, and baptized them.”

The “restore all things” part of Christ’s statement is at the heart of what makes this the most pivotal end-time prophecy. 

 

There are many end-time prophecies, and people naturally tend to focus on the ones about wars and rumors of wars, earthquakes and supernatural disasters. Some people focus on things like blood moons. 

 

But this prophecy is what Jesus Christ focused on. 

 

This prophecy is directly connected with His Second Coming: He said this man would restore all truth within the Church just before the Day of the Lord. This is a sign of the nearness of Jesus Christ’s return that you must not ignore! 

 

And what makes this even more important is that this prophecy has already been fulfilled!"

But according to the Bible (and basic math), Herbert couldn’t possibly have been the end-time Elijah. He died in 1986, the “very end of the Church age” hasn’t arrived yet, and the 6,000 years from Adam aren’t up. Crackpot Bob helpfully points this out while dragging in Dibar Apartian and Aaron Dean like yesterday’s toilet paper—about as useful as either would be plugging a hole in a dam.ording torackpot Bob, Herbert cannot be the endtime Elijah:

But, according to the Bible, could Herbert W. Armstrong have been the Elijah to come (Matthew 17)?

Let’s start with Malachi 4:5-6, but as shown in the Jewish Publication Society translation:

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet

Before the coming Of the great and terrible day of the LORD.

And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children,

And the heart of the children to their fathers;

Lest I come and smite the land with utter destruction.

Notice that the Elijah is to come just before the great and terrible day of the LORD, and if he did not come, utter destruction would occur.

Herbert W. Armstrong died in January 16, 1986.

Now let’s see what Herbert W. Armstrong actually wrote about the timing of the final Elijah:

Also Malachi 4:5-6 pictures the Elijah to come at the very end of the Church age (Mystery of the Ages. 1985, p. 349).

When did Herbert W. Armstrong write that the Church age was over? Notice:

At the end of the Church age and 6,000 years from Adam, Christ would return to earth as King of kings and Lord of Lords, ruling all nations, with the saints, for one millennium. (Armstrong HW. What If Adam Had Taken of the Tree of Life? Plan Truth, March 1983)

The “very end” of the Church age was not over 37 years ago! The 6000 years have NOT yet been fulfilled. Since the “very end of the Church age” has not happened, and Herbert W. Armstrong died decades ago, his writings support that there must be another Elijah. And he was referring to an individual in the Mystery of the Ages.

So who in the entire world could the entime Elijah be???? It is impossible to understand who this is. Oh, wait! Its none other than Crackpot Bob, teh Great Bwana! Woo Hoo!

But wait! Before he offers the proof that he is the choden one, he drags of Dibar Apartian and Aaron Dean. Apartian's words are about a suseless as a roll of toilet paper being used to plug a hole in a dam.

That being said, sometimes Herbert W. Armstrong did think that he may have fulfilled the Elijah role, but he told the late Dibar Apartian (who told me) that he was NOT the Elijah. Dibar Apartian did not believe that Herbert W. Armstrongwas the Elijah when we discussed this several times and he agreed with me about this. Furthermore, essentially on his deathbed, Herbert W. Armstrong admitted to his closest aide, Aaron Dean (who told me this multiple times) that there could be an Elijah to come after he died (see also The Elijah Heresies).

Combining what Herbert W. Armstrong wrote in The Mystery of the Ages and the length of time since his death demonstrates that Herbert W. Armstrong could not have been the final prophesied Elijah.

Crackpot Bob, The Great Bwana, then starts offering the PROOF that we should all be standing in awe of and trembling in fear that we are lost and without hope because we deny him.

Since the Bible does teach that there will be an ‘Elijah’ who is alive right before Jesus returns (Malachi 4:5-6), thus it is not possible that Herbert W. Armstrong was the prophesied final Elijah.

Now, presuming Jesus will return within the next couple of decades, then that ‘Elijah’ would need to be alive now. And he would be part of the church that places the highest priority on the truth.

Yet, most Christians seemingly refuse to accept that.

We in the Continuing Church of God are regularly restoring more truth about church history...

Then comes the grand reveal: since Jesus is obviously returning in the next decade (trust him, he’s checked), the real Elijah must be alive right now. And wouldn’t you know it, he just happens to be part of the one organization that places the “highest priority on truth”—the Continuing Church of God. What an amazing coincidence!

There is a 21st century Elijah, and that individual would be expected to be part of the Continuing Church of God.

Was the restoration of more knowledge supposed to happen?

Yes. 

 Herbert Armstrong later wrote that he was NOT a prophet:

I have definitely NOT been called to be a PROPHET (Armstrong H. Personal from the Editor, The 19 Year Time Cycles. The Good News of Tomorrow’s World. February, 1972, p. 1).

Since Herbert Armstrong was not a prophet, Elijah was a prophet (1 Kings 18:36), the Elijah to come is to be a prophet (Malachi 4:5), and the two witnesses will be prophets, Herbert W. Armstrong was not the Elijah to come

Crackpot Bob, the Great Bwana, argues that because Herbert Armstrong openly said he was NOT a prophet, he couldn’t have been Elijah (who was a prophet). Therefore, the job is still open… and guess who’s humbly volunteering? The same guy who’s already preached an entire sermon alluding to the fact that he might be one of the Two Witless Witnesses, too. (If only he talked about Jesus half as much as he talks about himself.)

Was John the Baptist the prophesied Elijah or at least a type of Elijah? Is there an Elijah to come? Have Sabbatarians been teaching this a long time? What were 18 truths that Herbert W. Armstrong said God had him restore? Was anything to be restored in the last days, consistent with Daniel 12:4 and Matthew 17:11? Was God supposed to restore dreams and prophets in the last days? Did the Worldwide Church of God teach such would happen again? Have we seen signs of Acts 2:17-18 in the Continuing Church of God? Is Bob Thiel the final Elijah or one of the two witnesses? Why or why not? Has there been the restoration of important truths in the CCOG? Is the CCOG at least setting the foundation for the 21st century Elijah? Dr. Thiel gives information relating to all of that in this sermon. 

He finishes by broadly flicking his limp wrist at anyone who dares disagree, labeling them Laodiceans—because nothing says “man of God” like rebranding everyone who won’t worship you as doomed.

Crackpot Bob, the Great Bwana, then goes on to preach another sermon on how magnificent he is. If only he talked about Jesus as much as he talks about himself!

Jesus stated that an Elijah to come would restore all things (Mathew 17:11). Did Herbert W. Armstrong restore anything? Consistent with Daniel 12:4, were there truths that were to be restored in the 21st century? What are some that have been restored? What about church history, the original catholic church, the faith once for all delivered to the saints, and apostolic succession? What were the last days signs of Acts 2:17-18? What about teachings on violent sports, the fulness of the Gentiles, using scores of languages to help fulfill Matthew 24:14, non-trinitarian ramifications, prophetic matters, the identity of the man of sin, Daniel 11:39 and the start of the Great Tribulation, the identity of Samaria, the connection between Habakkuk 2:1-8 and the United States of America, the final phase of the work, the mark of the Beast, and the third resurrection? Has the Continuing Church of God been restoring matters in the 21st century? Dr. Thiel addresses these questions and more. 

Oh, Bwana Bob. Sweet, self-anointed Bob. If humility were a spiritual gift, you’d still be begging for the crumbs under the table. You strut around declaring yourself the final Elijah, the restorer of all things, and possibly one of the Two Witnesses—all while producing more hot air than a Laodicean hair dryer. Newsflash, Great Bwana: real prophets don’t spend their waking hours writing sermons about how spectacular they are and how everyone else is too blind to see their brilliance. They don’t need to beg for awe; it follows them naturally.

You’re not restoring truth—you’re restoring your own bruised ego, one narcissistic sermon at a time. Keep polishing that itty-bitty horn, Crackpot. When the real Elijah shows up (or, heaven forbid, when Christ actually returns), your carefully crafted fantasy is going to collapse faster than your relevance in the real Church of God. Until then, enjoy your tiny kingdom. Clown shoes on, Bob. The show must go on. 

Armstrongism and The Gap Theory

In Armstrongism, the Gap Theory is not merely one possible interpretation of Genesis 1:1-2—it is presented as a foundational “revealed truth” that unlocks the Bible’s hidden meaning and harmonizes Scripture with the scientific evidence of an ancient earth, fossils, and dinosaurs. Armstrong wove it deeply into his theology in works like Mystery of the Ages (1985) and the booklet Did God Create a Devil?, calling it a “surprising truth… unrecognized by religion, by science and by higher education.”

Armstrongism’s Core Teaching on the Gap

Genesis 1:1 records God’s original perfect creation of the heavens and the earth “in the beginning.” This creation was beautiful, harmonious, and “very good.” It happened an unknown length of time ago—Armstrong said it “might have been millions—or even billions—of years” (or even “trillions” in some statements). This original world included plants, animals, and the full fossil record we see today. 

 

A long, unrecorded “gap” of time follows. During this period, Lucifer (Satan) and one-third of the angels rebelled against God. Their sin turned the earth into a state of ruin and chaos. Armstrong taught that this angelic rebellion caused a global catastrophe—sometimes called “Lucifer’s flood”—that destroyed the original creation, leaving the earth “without form, and void” (tohu wa bohu—waste and empty, chaotic and in confusion).

Genesis 1:2 therefore describes the ruined earth after that catastrophe, not the initial state of creation. Armstrong emphasized: “God did not create the earth in a state of waste and confusion. The earth became chaotic as a result of the sin of the angels.” The Hebrew word hayah (“was”) is understood here as “became,” showing a transition from perfection to ruin.

Beginning in Genesis 1:3, God performs a re-creation or restoration of the earth in six literal 24-hour days, roughly 6,000 years ago. This is the week that produced the world we know, including Adam and Eve and the animals listed in Genesis 1. The original creation (including dinosaurs) is not re-created; only a new order is established on the ruined planet.

This view allows Armstrongism to accept the mainstream scientific timeline for the earth’s age and the fossil record while preserving a strictly literal six-day creation week—just not the original one.

How Armstrongism Specifically “Deals With” Dinosaurs

Dinosaurs (along with the entire pre-Adamic fossil record—trilobites, marine reptiles, extinct mammals, etc.) belong entirely to the original creation of Genesis 1:1. They lived, died, and were buried during the long gap period. When Lucifer rebelled, the resulting cataclysm wiped them out, producing the layered fossil beds and geological formations we observe today. The six-day re-creation in Genesis 1:3 onward does not include new dinosaurs; they remain only as fossils in the ground from the ruined former world.

Armstrong tied this directly to Satan’s fall: the decay, death, and destruction visible in the fossil record (including diseased bones and extinction events) resulted from angelic sin before Adam, not from human sin. This fits Armstrongism’s broader doctrine that Satan was once the ruler of the earth, that sin and chaos entered creation through him, and that the six-day week was God’s act of restitution—a preview of the ultimate “restitution of all things” (Acts 3:21) at the end of the age.

Key Differences from the General Gap Theory

The version taught in Armstrongism is essentially the classic “ruin-reconstruction” or “Lucifer’s flood” form of the Gap Theory, but presented with unique emphasis:

It is not just a scientific accommodation—it is central to understanding God’s plan, the origin of evil, and why the earth was in chaos when the Spirit of God began moving on the waters in Genesis 1:2.

Armstrong rejected evolution but fully embraced deep time via the gap, insisting the Bible itself requires it.

He used the same proof texts as other gap theorists (Isaiah 45:18, Jeremiah 4:23, Isaiah 34:11, Ezekiel 28, etc.) but framed them as “God’s revelation” through him as apostle.

A Note on Broader Scholarship

While Armstrongism holds this as essential doctrine, the grammatical, contextual, and theological problems with the Gap Theory (the waw-disjunctive structure of Genesis 1:2 forbidding a chronological gap, the normal meaning of “was” rather than “became,” the lack of any biblical mention of a prior world or Lucifer’s flood, and the conflict with passages like Exodus 20:11 and Romans 5:12) remain the same as outlined in the earlier responses. Most Hebrew scholars and creationist organizations across the spectrum still consider it unsupported by the text itself.

In Armstrongism, however, the Gap Theory is embraced as the correct understanding that resolves the apparent conflict between Genesis and the fossil/dinosaur evidence—placing the ancient world and its destruction firmly in the unmentioned “gap” while keeping the six literal days of re-creation intact.

Yes, the Gap Theory directly attempts to "deal with" dinosaurs (and the broader fossil record) by placing them in the supposed long period of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

How the Gap Theory Handles Dinosaurs

Genesis 1:1 is interpreted as God’s original, perfect creation of the heavens and the earth — a fully functional world that included plants, animals, and creatures like dinosaurs (and possibly other extinct life forms or even "pre-Adamic" beings in some versions).

During this ancient "gap" period (millions or billions of years), the geological ages unfolded, dinosaurs lived and died, and the fossil record formed.

Then, a catastrophic judgment — often called "Lucifer’s flood" or a global cataclysm linked to Satan’s rebellion and fall — destroyed that original world, leaving the earth "without form and void" (tohu wa bohu) as described in Genesis 1:2.

Starting in Genesis 1:3, God begins a re-creation or restoration of the earth in six literal days, populating it with new animals and eventually Adam and Eve. The dinosaurs from the gap period do not appear in this re-created world (except perhaps as fossils in the ground).

This approach allows gap theorists to accept the mainstream scientific view that dinosaurs lived and went extinct tens of millions of years ago, while still holding to a literal six-day creation week (just not the original creation).

Common Details in Gap Theory Versions

Dinosaurs and the entire fossil record (trilobites, marine reptiles, mammals, etc.) belong to the pre-gap "original creation."

Death, suffering, and extinction happened long before Adam’s sin — the catastrophe in the gap is blamed for the mass die-off.

Some versions also squeeze in ice ages, "ape-men," or other prehistoric elements into this gap.
Criticisms of This Explanation (from Young-Earth Creationist Perspectives)

Young-earth creationist groups (such as Answers in Genesis, ICR, and Creation Ministries International) strongly reject this handling of dinosaurs for several reasons:

• It introduces death and suffering on a massive scale before Adam’s fall, which conflicts with passages like Romans 5:12 (death entered through sin) and the idea that the original creation was "very good."

The Hebrew grammar of Genesis 1:2 does not support a chronological gap or a "became" ruined state, as explained previously.

Exodus 20:11 says God made everything (heavens, earth, sea, and all in them) in six days — leaving no room for a prior creation full of dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs can be accounted for without a gap: they were created on Day 6 as land animals (Genesis 1:24-25), lived alongside humans, and most died in Noah’s Flood (with some possibly surviving briefly afterward). Biblical descriptions like Behemoth in Job 40 are sometimes seen as fitting certain dinosaurs.

Reasons Why the Gap Can't Be Supported

 
The Gap Theory claims that a vast period of time (millions or billions of years), including Lucifer’s rebellion and a global catastrophe (“Lucifer’s flood”), occurred between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. It places dinosaurs and the fossil record in this “gap,” while Genesis 1:3 onward describes a six-day re-creation. This view, popularized in Armstrongism, attempts to reconcile the Bible with an old earth. However, it is fundamentally flawed for several key reasons:

• Hebrew Grammar Forbids It 
• Genesis 1:2 begins with a waw-disjunctive construction (a standard Hebrew way to give background information). It does not allow a chronological gap or the translation of “was” (hayah) as “became.” The verse simply describes the initial unformed state of the earth, not a ruined world after catastrophe.
• No Scriptural Support for a Prior World 
• The Bible never mentions a pre-Adamic creation, Lucifer’s flood, or a ruined earth before the six days. Exodus 20:11 clearly states that God made the heavens, earth, sea, and everything in them in six days — leaving no room for an earlier creation and destruction.
• Theological Problems with Death Before Sin 
• The theory places widespread death, suffering, and extinction (including dinosaurs) before Adam’s fall. This contradicts Romans 5:12 and 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, which teach that death entered the world through human sin, not through angelic rebellion.
• Misinterpretation of Key Phrases 
• The phrase “without form and void” (tohu wa bohu) describes the raw, unformed state of creation before God shaped and filled it — not a state of judgment or ruin. Isaiah 45:18 simply means God did not create the earth to remain empty, not that an initial formless state was impossible.

In short, the Gap Theory is an understandable but unsuccessful 19th-century attempt to accommodate deep time. It reads ideas into the text that are not present and creates more contradictions than it solves. The straightforward reading of Genesis 1 presents one creation event: God created the heavens and earth, initially unformed and unfilled, then shaped and filled it in six literal days.

This interpretation upholds the unity and clarity of Scripture without forcing an artificial gap between the first two verses.

One of the main reasons people adopt or promote the Gap Theory is precisely to "deal with" dinosaurs and the fossil record by shoving them into that unmentioned ancient period. However, as noted, the theory itself is not supported by the actual text of Genesis or standard Hebrew exegesis. It remains a popular attempt at harmonizing the Bible with deep time, but it creates more theological and textual problems than it solves for many Bible believers.

The 1975 Prophecies That Never Happened: How the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Worldwide Church of God Built—and Then Denied—Expectations of Doom

When you watch this video, you will see how the WCG was almost exactly like the JW's 

when it came to members dealing with the prophecies.

The 1975 Prophecies That Never Happened: 

How the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Worldwide Church of God 

Built—and Then Denied—Expectations of Doom

In the decades after World War II, two fast-growing religious movements captured the imagination of hundreds of thousands of believers with urgent warnings about the end of the world. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Worldwide Church of God (WCG), founded by Herbert W. Armstrong, both tied Bible prophecy to the specific year 1975. Their publications painted 1975 as the climax of 6,000 years of human history, the trigger for global catastrophe, and the possible start of Christ’s millennial reign. Followers sold homes, quit jobs, postponed marriages, and poured resources into the organizations in anticipation. When nothing apocalyptic occurred, both groups faced mass disillusionment—and sharp accusations that they had lied to their members.

Neither organization ever printed the exact words “Armageddon will strike in 1975.” But both used language that made the year seem inevitable, authoritative, and biblically certain. When the date passed quietly, they pivoted to denial, blame-shifting, and quiet revisions. Here is the documented record.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses: “Six Thousand Years End in 1975”

The foundation was laid in 1966 with the book Life Everlasting—in Freedom of the Sons of God. It presented a “trustworthy Bible chronology” showing that Adam was created in 4026 B.C.E. Adding 6,000 years brought the timeline to the fall of 1975:

According to this trustworthy Bible chronology six thousand years from man’s creation will end in 1975, and the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 C.E. … How appropriate it would be for Jehovah God to make of this coming seventh period of a thousand years a Sabbath period of rest and release, a great Jubilee sabbath for the proclaiming of liberty throughout the earth to all its inhabitants!

The Watchtower magazine amplified the excitement. A 1968 article titled “Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975?” asked readers to consider whether the Battle of Armageddon might conclude by autumn 1975. A 1968 Kingdom Ministry bulletin told congregation leaders: “Less than a hundred months separate us from the end of 6000 years of man’s history. What can you do in that time?” District conventions featured slogans like “Stay Alive Till ’75.” In some countries, elders openly urged members to sell property, pioneer full-time, and avoid long-term plans.

The message was unmistakable to those inside the organization. Thousands of families liquidated assets, delayed having children, and devoted every spare hour to preaching. When 1975 ended with no Armageddon, the exodus began. Many who had sacrificed careers and savings felt betrayed.

The Watch Tower Society’s response was consistent and revealing. In October 1975 it acknowledged “considerable individual speculation” but insisted its publications “have never said that the world’s end would come then.” By 1976 it blamed members’ “own understanding” based on “wrong premises.” A later article claimed the disappointment was a faith-testing “sifting” process and quietly adjusted the chronology by inserting an undetermined gap between Adam’s and Eve’s creation. The organization has never admitted it manufactured false hope; it has only denied making an official prediction.

The Worldwide Church of God: “1975 in Prophecy!”

Herbert W. Armstrong’s Radio Church of God (renamed the Worldwide Church of God in 1968) took a different but equally dramatic approach. In 1956 Armstrong published the 32-page booklet 1975 in Prophecy!, lavishly illustrated with apocalyptic artwork by Mad magazine cartoonist Basil Wolverton. The booklet contrasted humanity’s “fantastic push-button world” of technological progress with God’s coming wrath. It warned that by the mid-1970s a devastating drought would kill one-third of the world’s population, followed by nuclear war that would kill another third, with the survivors sold into slavery. Christ would then return to establish the Kingdom of God.

The booklet became a cornerstone of WCG outreach, distributed by the millions alongside The United States and Britain in Prophecy. Armstrong’s radio broadcasts and The Plain Truth magazine hammered the same theme for nearly two decades: the Great Tribulation and Christ’s return were scheduled for the early-to-mid 1970s, with 1975 as the outside limit. Members were told the church would flee to a “place of safety” (often identified as Petra, Jordan) in 1972, emerging in 1975 to rule with Christ.

When 1975 arrived and passed without tribulation, famine, or nuclear holocaust, Armstrong quietly withdrew the booklet from circulation. He never issued a formal retraction or apology. Instead, later writings simply stopped mentioning specific dates. After Armstrong’s death in 1986, the WCG underwent massive doctrinal changes and eventually abandoned Armstrong’s prophetic framework entirely. Offshoot groups that retained the original teachings have since tried to reinterpret or downplay the failed timeline.

The Common Pattern: Bold Implication, Then Denial

Both organizations followed the same playbook:

• Authoritative chronology presented as “Bible truth.”
• Urgent language that stopped just short of an explicit date.
• Life-altering actions encouraged among the rank-and-file.
• Post-failure blame placed on members’ “misunderstandings” or “speculation.”
• No formal admission of error—only claims that the organization never said what everyone inside clearly heard.

Critics argue this constitutes deception. When leaders publish detailed timelines, circulate countdown bulletins, and celebrate slogans like “Stay Alive Till ’75” while simultaneously insisting “we never set a date,” the result is classic bait-and-switch. Followers who acted in good faith were left financially and emotionally devastated, while the organizations retained power and continued to demand loyalty and donations.

The 1975 episode is not ancient history. It remains one of the clearest modern examples of how date-specific prophecy can be used to control behavior, extract commitment, and then be memory-holed when it fails. Both groups survived the scandal, but thousands of former members never recovered their trust—either in the organizations or in the very idea of end-time prophecy delivered by men. The record shows that when religious leaders promise the end is precisely calculable, history has a way of proving them wrong—and their followers pay the price.

A Devastating Legacy: The Human Wreckage of 1975

When the calendar flipped from 1975 into 1976, the world did not end. But for thousands of sincere believers in the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Worldwide Church of God, something far more personal did collapse: their entire sense of reality, security, and hope.

They had believed with all their hearts. They had sold their homes, emptied their savings, quit their jobs, postponed marriages, skipped college, and turned their backs on careers—because their leaders had painted 1975 as the unmistakable, Bible-guaranteed finish line of human history. The promises were delivered with the full authority of “God’s organization” and “God’s apostle.” The urgency was relentless. The stakes were eternal.

Then the date passed in silence.

What followed was not merely disappointment. It was a slow-motion spiritual and emotional catastrophe. Families who had liquidated everything woke up to empty bank accounts and no retirement. Young people who had sacrificed their educations found themselves in their thirties with no credentials and no future. Parents who had refused to have children because “this system won’t last that long” faced the quiet grief of empty nests and irreversible regret. Marriages fractured under the weight of dashed expectations and mutual blame. Depression, anxiety, and in some cases suicide shadowed the years that followed.

The organizations offered no apologies, no restitution, and no accountability—only the cold insistence that they had “never said” what every member clearly heard. The very leaders who had stoked the fire of urgency now stood back and watched the faithful burn, then blamed the victims for misunderstanding.

For both groups, 1975 was not just a failed date on a chart. It was a betrayal that shattered lives. It robbed people of their best years, their financial stability, their education, their families, and, for many, their faith itself. The damage was not abstract theology—it was measured in foreclosed homes, broken marriages, abandoned dreams, and decades of quiet despair.

Decades later, the survivors still carry the scars. Some rebuilt. Many never fully recovered. All of them learned the same bitter lesson: when religious leaders weaponize prophecy to demand total sacrifice, the only thing that truly ends in 1975 is the innocence of those who believed them.

The world kept spinning. But for countless ex-members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Worldwide Church of God, time itself stopped in the autumn of 1975—and part of them has never moved forward since.