If it was good enough for Jesus and the Apostles, then it is good enough for me!

If it was good enough for Jesus and the Apostles, then it is good enough for me!

This belief is flawed for New Covenant Christians because it fails to account for the transitional nature of the Gospels and early Acts, the shift from the Old Covenant to the New, and the clear New Testament teaching that not everything Jesus or the Apostles did or allowed in their Jewish context is a binding command for all believers today.

1. Jesus Lived Under the Old Covenant (as the One Who Fulfilled It)

Jesus was "born under the law" (Galatians 4:4) to fulfill it perfectly as Israel's Messiah (Matthew 5:17). He kept the Mosaic Law—including circumcision on the eighth day, Sabbath observance, temple worship, and Jewish festivals—because that was the covenant in force during His earthly ministry. He did not come to destroy the Law but to fulfill it and inaugurate something new.

• Example: Jesus was circumcised and kept the Sabbath. This doesn't mean New Covenant believers must do the same as a requirement. The New Testament explicitly teaches that circumcision is not required for Gentiles (Acts 15; Galatians 5), and the Sabbath command (as a Mosaic shadow) is not binding in the same way under the New Covenant (Colossians 2:16-17; Romans 14:5-6; Hebrews 4).

• Requiring believers to imitate every detail of Jesus' Jewish life would ignore that He fulfilled the shadows (ceremonial law, sacrifices, etc.) so we live in the reality (Hebrews 8-10).

Deeper meaning: The Old Covenant elements were never ends in themselves; they were profound types and shadows pointing to greater spiritual realities in Christ. The Sabbath pictured our ultimate rest in Him (Hebrews 4:9-10); the festivals foreshadowed the stages of redemption—Passover as Christ's sacrifice, Unleavened Bread as putting away sin through His body, etc. Jesus embodied and completed these deeper prophetic layers, transforming external rituals into living fulfillment. The New Covenant (promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 and instituted by Jesus' blood, Luke 22:20) writes God's law on hearts through the indwelling Spirit, emphasizing inward transformation, grace-empowered obedience, and freedom from the old system's external ceremonies.

2. The Apostles Operated in a Transitional Period

The book of Acts shows the early church (mostly Jewish at first) gradually transitioning. The Apostles continued some Jewish practices initially for cultural reasons, evangelism among Jews, or while the New Covenant was unfolding:

• They attended temple and synagogues (Acts 2-3).
• They kept certain feasts or vows (e.g., Paul in Acts 21).
• But this was not mandated for Gentile believers.

The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) directly refutes blanket imitation: Jewish Christians wanted Gentiles to follow Mosaic practices (including circumcision). The Apostles and elders, led by the Holy Spirit, ruled no—only a few basic guidelines (no idolatry, sexual immorality, etc.). This shows not everything the Apostles "did" was prescriptive for the whole church.

Paul strongly opposed imposing Old Covenant practices:

• For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" (Galatians 5:1, on circumcision).
• He taught that food laws and days (including Sabbaths) are matters of liberty, not law (Romans 14; Colossians 2:16).

Deeper meaning: This transition reveals God's progressive revelation—moving from national, external covenant signs to a universal, Spirit-indwelt people. The Apostles' early practices bridged the old and new, but the Epistles clarify the deeper reality: the church now lives in the fulfilled era where the "shadows" give way to the "substance" in Christ.

3. Armstrongism and This Flawed Belief

This exact reasoning—"If Jesus and the Apostles did it, then we must do it too"—is a core foundation of Armstrongism (the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God and its offshoots, such as the Philadelphia Church of God or United Church of God).

Armstrong taught that true New Covenant Christians must continue to observe:

• The Seventh-day Sabbath (Friday sunset to Saturday sunset) as a perpetual covenant and "sign" identifying God's true people.
• The annual Holy Days (Passover, Days of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles, and the Last Great Day) because they picture God's "master plan of salvation."
• Old Testament dietary laws (clean/unclean meats from Leviticus 11—no pork, shellfish, etc.).
• Other practices like tithing and avoiding "pagan" holidays (Christmas, Easter, birthdays).

Deeper meanings in Armstrongism: Armstrong emphasized that these observances carry profound prophetic and redemptive depth far beyond surface rituals. The Holy Days are not mere Jewish relics but a divine blueprint revealing "God's great master plan of redemption" and "the different epochs in the plan of spiritual creation." They reenact year after year the full story of salvation:

• Passover: Christ's sacrifice for sin.
• Unleavened Bread: Putting sin out of our lives.
• Pentecost: The giving of the Holy Spirit and the Church age.
• Trumpets: Christ's second coming.
• Atonement: Satan bound and sins removed.
• Tabernacles: The Millennium (1,000-year reign).
• Last Great Day: The final Great White Throne judgment and harvest of souls.

Armstrong taught that these have "deeper dimensions" explained in the New Testament, yet still require literal, ongoing observance "forever" to stay in "true memory and worship of God," understand His plan, and qualify for the Kingdom. The New Covenant, in this view, internalizes the law (including these elements) rather than abolishing any part of it. Jesus and the Apostles set the "perfect example," and departing from it leads to apostasy. Salvation involves faith plus this obedient law-keeping as a condition for final justification and becoming part of the "God Family."

This approach takes descriptive historical examples from the Gospels and early Acts and turns them into timeless, binding commands—exactly the belief the original article identifies as flawed. As the blog As Bereans Did explains in its recent post on this very argument:

ARGUMENT #8 'If Jesus and the Apostles did it then we must do it too.' At first, this sounds like a fantastic idea. What could possibly be wrong about doing what Jesus and the Apostles did? Isn't that the definition of discipleship?... Let's get something perfectly clear - this isn't about true discipleship and following Jesus' examples of faith, love, self sacrifice, mercy, justice, etc etc, it's about justifying Sabbatarianism, for which there is no law. This is not about the spirit of the law or even the letter of the law, it's about workarounds.

The post continues by highlighting the inconsistency:

We must ask ourselves, why did Jesus and the Apostles do what they did? Answer: because they were literally Old Covenant Jews... Are we all to be first century Jews now? (Be careful here! Say 'no' and this argument falls apart, but say 'yes' and your church falls apart.)... This 'Jesus and apostolic precedent' argument is only intended to get the Sabbath, but as it turns out it applies to everything else. We can't appeal only until we get what we want then back out.

It further notes the selective nature: Jesus and the Apostles attended synagogues (not modern churches), observed broader Jewish customs, and lived under all 613 Old Covenant laws during His ministry. Yet Sabbatarian applications cherry-pick only certain practices while rejecting the full implications.

4. The New Testament Distinguishes Descriptive vs. Prescriptive

The Bible records what happened (descriptive) but does not always command us to repeat it (prescriptive). Examples:

• Jesus and the Apostles spoke in tongues or healed dramatically → Not a universal command for every believer today.
• Apostles chose Matthias by casting lots (Acts 1) → Not the normal way churches select leaders later.
• Temporary practices during the apostolic era (sign gifts confirming the message, Hebrews 2:3-4) don't bind the church for all time.

We imitate their faith, character, and teachings (1 Corinthians 11:1; Hebrews 13:7), not every cultural or transitional action. The core commands for the church come from the risen Christ's instructions through the Apostles in the Epistles, focused on the "law of Christ" (love, faith, Spirit-led obedience).

Deeper meaning in the New Testament: Armstrongism's emphasis on the "master plan" through ongoing shadows misses the profound fulfillment theology of the Epistles. Colossians 2:16-17 declares these days "a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." The deeper realities they pictured—rest, redemption, harvest—are now inaugurated in Him. The New Covenant does not merely "internalize" the old system; it transforms our relationship with God from external compulsion to heart-level obedience empowered by the Spirit (Ezekiel 36:26-27; Hebrews 8:6-13). Paul warns that mandating these observances as essential returns believers to "weak and worthless elementary principles" and a "yoke of slavery" (Galatians 4:9; 5:1), undermining the finished work of Christ.

5. What New Covenant Christians Do Follow

• Teachings of Jesus and Apostles: The Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20—"teach them to observe all that I have commanded you"), moral principles (e.g., the love command fulfilling the law, Romans 13:8-10), baptism, Lord's Supper, church leadership, etc.
• Grace, not legalism: We are under the New Covenant, not the Old (Hebrews 8:6-13). The Old Testament remains instructive (history, types, wisdom, moral truths), but its covenantal forms are fulfilled in Christ.

Deeper meaning: True New Covenant living flows from union with Christ—the deeper obedience of the heart, where the Spirit produces fruit that the law could only command (Romans 8:1-4; Galatians 5:22-23). This brings genuine freedom, intimacy with God, and focus on the gospel's power rather than external forms.

Conclusion: Armstrongism vs. the New Covenant

In contrasting Armstrongism with biblical New Covenant faith, we encounter two profoundly different visions of discipleship. Armstrongism, rooted in a sincere and zealous desire to honor Jesus by walking exactly as He and the Apostles walked, offers a compelling framework: a perpetual calendar of Sabbaths and Holy Days that unlocks God's "master plan of salvation" in vivid, yearly reenactments. It promises deeper prophetic insight, clear identity as God's true people, and a path of obedient law-keeping that secures one's place in the coming Kingdom. Yet this very system, for all its biblical language and heartfelt devotion, keeps believers anchored to the fading shadows of the Old Covenant. It elevates descriptive historical examples into timeless commands, blending law and grace in a way the New Testament explicitly rejects as a return to "weak and beggarly elements" (Galatians 4:9) and a "yoke of slavery" (Galatians 5:1). What begins as earnest imitation can subtly shift the finished work of Christ into an ongoing requirement, turning the gospel of pure grace into another gospel that mixes faith with works for final justification.

As Bereans Did powerfully summarizes the problem with this argument in the context of Sabbatarianism (a hallmark of Armstrongist teaching):

Today, we looked at the claim 'If Jesus and the Apostles did it, that means we must do it, too.' It sounded great at first, but like all the rest, it comes apart when you dig in. We peeled back layers of conflicts and inconsistencies until we saw how this argument is really based on Jews being Jewish, who went to synagogue not church, because of a tradition of the Pharisees... The argument is not really about [what] Jesus and the Apostles did, but it uses them to rationalize a means to create a law where there is no law. Sabbatarianism is not supported by the full historical and biblical witness, but by cherry-picking and excluding whatever does not fit. It is not a clear mandate, but an opinion.

By contrast, the New Covenant unveils a far richer, more intimate, and liberating reality. It is not a refined version of the old system, but its complete and glorious fulfillment in the person of Jesus Christ. Every shadow—Sabbath rest, festival harvest, clean/unclean distinctions—finds its resounding "Yes" and "Amen" in Him (2 Corinthians 1:20). In Christ we already enjoy the true Sabbath rest (Hebrews 4:9-10), the outpoured Spirit of Pentecost, the assured hope of His return, and the final harvest of souls. The law is no longer external tablets but a living reality written on transformed hearts by the indwelling Holy Spirit (Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 36:26-27). Salvation is by grace through faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), and the obedience that flows from it is the natural fruit of union with the risen Lord (Romans 8:1-4; Galatians 5:22-23).

For anyone drawn to Armstrongism's call to "live exactly as Jesus lived," the full New Testament offers an even deeper invitation: imitate the faith, character, and inspired teaching of Christ and His Apostles as unfolded in the Epistles. Release the shadows that have served their purpose (Hebrews 8:13) and step fully into the substance who is Christ. Here is the abundant life He promised—gospel freedom, Spirit-empowered joy, and unbroken fellowship with the Father—where every moment is lived in the radiant light of His declaration, "It is finished" (John 19:30). This is the heart of the New Covenant: not a checklist to prove worthiness, but a living relationship that magnifies the finished work of the Savior and sets the soul truly free.

Silent Pilgrim

See: 

Common Legalist Arguments - Part VIII

A critical look at using the claim, "If Jesus and the Apostles did it then we must do it too," as a justification for requiring Christians to attend church on Saturday.

How to tell if you are a Laodicean or a TRUE Church of God Member

 

The Church of God’s Glorious Petra Escape Plan: Because Nothing Says “Place of Safety” Like Squatting in Jordan’s Tourist Trap

For decades, the various Churches of God have lovingly drilled into their members the thrilling end-time adventure known as “The Place of Safety.” According to this cherished teaching, when the Great Tribulation kicks off, the faithful few will be rounded up by what’s left of the U.S. government (now apparently run by invading Germans, because why not add Nazis to the mix?) and herded into concentration camps. From there, they’ll be miraculously transported — not by boring old buses or trains, but by being flown on eagles’ wings straight to Petra in Jordan.

Yes, you read that right. Divine eagles. Or, as some of the more practically minded ministers used to quietly whisper, commercial airplanes…but those planes would have metal fatigue, and the Germans would put us on these planes with the hope they would crash before we made it to Petra. Because nothing builds faith like hoping your rescue flight does not plummet into the ocean or desert.

The best part? Apparently, no one in the Church of God ever bothered to run this plan by the Jordanians.

Picture it: thousands of slightly unhinged American cultists led by Bob Thiel, Gerald Flurry, and Dave Pack, suddenly materializing in the middle of Jordan, confidently announcing, “Excuse us, we’re God’s special remnant. We’ll be taking over Petra now — you know, your ancient city and massively profitable tourist attraction. Thanks so much! Don’t mind us while we wait out the Tribulation in your backyard. Oh, and you are supposed to feed us, take care of our sanitation needs, and provide us with beds, blankets, clothing, shoes, and anything else we are used to as God's chosen people.”

One can only imagine the Jordanian tourism minister’s face when informed that a bunch of prophecy-obsessed Midwesterners planned to commandeer one of the country’s biggest money-makers for three and a half years, all while claiming divine right of occupancy.

But hey, why spoil a good doctrine with minor details like international law, foreign sovereignty, or basic common sense?

In the end, that’s the quiet truth behind the Petra fantasy. The Church of God never really thought about anyone other than itself. The rest of the world — including the actual owners of Petra — were just background props in their very own private end-times movie. Jordanians? Germans? Crashing planes? Details, details. As long as the “true church” gets its exclusive VIP bunker in the rocks, everything else is someone else’s problem.

Truly, nothing says “God’s loving protection” quite like assuming the entire planet will happily rearrange itself so a tiny American splinter group can play biblical cosplay in a Jordanian national treasure.

 

Why Do So Many in Armstrongism Think Eating a Cheeseburger on the Sabbath Will Send You Straight to the Lake of Fire?

Ah, the Sabbath. That blessed 24-hour window where God supposedly looks down from heaven and says, “Finally, My people are resting… unless they dare order fries.”

If you’ve spent any time in the world of Armstrongism — those plucky little Church of God splinters still clinging to Herbert W. Armstrong’s legacy — you’ve probably noticed a peculiar obsession: the mortal sin of eating out on the Sabbath. Yes, friends, while some Christians are debating whether to sing contemporary worship songs, large chunks of the COG world are locked in serious theological combat over whether that Saturday lunch at Applebee’s is going to get you disfellowshipped.

Let’s break down this culinary crisis with the gravity it apparently deserves.

The Holy War Against Restaurant Servers

The reasoning goes something like this:

According to the Fourth Commandment, you’re not supposed to make your “servant” work on the Sabbath. And what is a modern waiter if not a 21st-century manservant who brings you iced tea and asks if you want fries with that? By handing over your credit card, you are apparently forcing that poor server to labor specifically for you. Never mind that they’d be working whether you showed up or not. Never mind that they don’t keep the Sabbath, don’t know who Herbert Armstrong is, and probably think “holy day” means their day off from school. Logic, apparently, takes a Sabbath rest too.

Some deep thinkers have even concluded that paying for a meal equals “engaging in commerce,” which is basically the same as setting up a flea market in the temple courtyard. Because nothing says “defiling the holy day” like a $12.99 lunch special and a side of guilt.

The “We Must Be More Holy Than Herbert” Movement

Here’s the funny part: Herbert W. Armstrong himself didn’t lose sleep over this. In a 1982 Bible study he basically shrugged and said, “Look, the restaurant’s open anyway. When I travel, I eat out or I starve. So I eat out.” The old Worldwide Church of God was generally fine with it, especially during the Feast when half the church was living in hotels.

But after Armstrong died and the big splits happened, a strange thing occurred. Some groups decided the best way to prove they were the real faithful remnant was to become stricter than the founder himself. Nothing says “we’re returning to the truth” quite like inventing new sins the Apostle Herbert never thought of.

Now you have sermons warning that enjoying a hot meal prepared by someone else is basically telling God, “Your Sabbath isn’t good enough — I need better service and a dessert menu.”

The Friday Night Meal Prep Olympics

As a result, many faithful brethren spend Friday afternoon in a frenzy of chopping, cooking, and Tupperware Tetris so that on the Sabbath they can proudly announce, “We don’t eat out — we eat cold roast beef and sad potato salad like real Christians.”

Because nothing screams “joyful holy convocation” like reheated leftovers and the quiet judgment of anyone who dares suggest maybe God doesn’t actually care if you tip your server 20%.

Of course, when traveling or stuck at the Feast with 800 other brethren, suddenly the rules get… flexible. Funny how that works.

The Official “It Depends” Position

To be fair, not every group is quite so dramatic. Some study papers calmly conclude that eating out isn’t technically a sin, but maybe you should feel a little bad about it anyway. Others leave it to “personal conscience” — which is church-speak for “we’re not going to disfellowship you… today.”

Meanwhile, Jesus is probably still shaking His head, remembering the time His disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and He told the Pharisees to chill out and learn what “mercy, not sacrifice” actually means.

So the next time you’re driving past a restaurant on Saturday afternoon and your stomach growls, just remember: somewhere out there, a dedicated Armstrongist is eating a carefully prepped sandwich made of bread, guilt, and lukewarm disapproval, all while feeling spiritually superior to you and your wicked ways.

Truly, the Sabbath is a delight.

Dave Pack Teaches Other COG Leaders How to Have Humility

Oh, what a truly glorious, jaw-dropping spectacle for the ages: Dave Pack, Gerald Flurry, and Bob Thiel — the undisputed, self-crowned champions of zero humility in the entire pathetic little Church of God universe. These three spiritual colossi have elevated the ancient art of being spectacularly, breathtakingly, almost comically full of themselves to an Olympic-level performance, all while piously pretending it’s just “God’s work” oozing from their oh-so-humble, divinely-anointed pores.

While the rest of us pathetic mortals are stuck down here wrestling with silly little concepts like basic self-awareness or the radical notion that we might, heaven forbid, be wrong about something, our holy trio soars far above such embarrassing earthly concerns on wings of pure, unadulterated ego. They don’t merely claim special roles — they hoard biblical titles like a hoard of dragons sitting on a pile of prophetic treasure. Gerald Flurry has grandly declared himself “That Prophet,” end-time Elijah, Malachi, lawgiver, watchman, and full-blown apostle, all while gravely informing the world that his precious Philadelphia Church of God is the only outfit God hasn’t already puked out like yesterday’s lukewarm coffee. Dave Pack has joyfully self-promoted to apostle, Joshua, Elijah, and “Messenger of the Covenant,” tirelessly assuring his ever-shrinking flock that any day now every other COG group will come crawling on their knees to kiss the ring of his superior brilliance. And Bob Thiel? Oh, bless his precious little heart — he’s graciously accepted his divine appointment as the world’s single most vital “evangelistic prophet,” supernaturally confirmed by his very own dreams and that ever-so-convenient “double blessing” that apparently only he and a couple of hand-picked yes-men could possibly detect.

Truly, the meek shall inherit the earth… right after these guys finish reserving the VIP section, the throne, and the entire heavenly press corps for themselves.

Even more awe-inspiring is their superhuman, ironclad refusal to ever, under any circumstances, admit even the tiniest speck of error. Failed prophecies? Shifted dates? Public face-plants so spectacular they’d make a lesser narcissist spontaneously combust? Not a problem for these flawless ones. Those aren’t mistakes — they’re “new revelation,” “refined understanding,” or obviously the fault of those nasty, Satan-serving Laodicean rebels who dared question God’s specially anointed snowflakes. While actual biblical prophets were face-down in the dust begging for mercy and real apostles called themselves the chief of sinners, these modern wonders prefer thundering from their pulpits about how extraordinarily, indispensably, uniquely special they are. How refreshing.

Their leadership model is pure, high-octane comedy gold: iron-fisted authoritarianism slathered in a microscopic layer of “submit or you’re serving Satan.” Members enjoy the sacred privilege of total, unquestioning obedience, generous “common” offerings (especially in Pack’s ever-ravenous kingdom), and the weekly joy of being reminded that anyone who leaves or disagrees is clearly deceived, rebellious, demon-possessed, or all of the above. It’s almost touching how effortlessly the gospel of Jesus Christ has been upgraded to the far superior, far more entertaining gospel of “Me, Myself, My Infallible Mantle, and My Next Failed Prediction.”

Why this radiant, blinding absence of humility, you ask? It’s really quite simple, darling. When you’ve successfully convinced a tiny, ever-dwindling band of followers that you alone carry the “Philadelphia mantle” while the rest of Christianity — and every other COG splinter — wallows in pathetic deception, humility isn’t just unnecessary — it’s practically heretical. Throw in three oversized egos, zero meaningful accountability, and a theological system custom-built to reward the most bombastic self-promotion imaginable, and voilà: you get this magnificent, side-splitting parade of men who claim to channel the Almighty yet somehow can’t manage to bow their own heads for five consecutive seconds without pausing to make sure the applause hasn’t died down.In the end, while the world hurtles toward its prophesied climax, these three modern-day “Elijahs,” “That Prophets,” and self-anointed apostles continue strutting on their ever-shrinking, ever-sadder stages, boldly declaring themselves the most important men since the Apostle Paul — perhaps even since Christ Himself (and let’s be brutally honest, they probably think they’ve got Him beat on both charisma and production value).

With flawless, almost artistic precision, they have mastered the rare spiritual gift of never being wrong, never needing correction, and never once choking out the words “I was mistaken.” Their humility is so deep, so profound, so otherworldly that it has evidently been raptured straight to heaven years ago, leaving only endless, thunderous declarations of their own unmatched greatness echoing through the empty halls behind.

Truly, it is a wonder to behold: men who claim to speak for the Almighty, yet somehow cannot bow their own heads. They warn the sheep of impending doom while refusing to examine the suffocating, soul-crushing pride that grins back at them in the mirror every single morning like a proud parent.

One can only imagine the scene on that final Day, when the real Elijah, the real apostles, and the real Head of the Church finally make their appearance.

May God have mercy on the souls who followed the deafening echo of their own voices… instead of the still, small one.















Analyze Sarcasm Techniques Used

Explore COG Historical Context

Intensify Sarcasm Even More

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.