When the Revelation Isn't Frightening Enough:Crackpot Bob's End Times Fear Show

Crackpot Bob's Gospel of Fear: Germany Is Coming-So Keep Obeying!

A New Covenant Critique of Bob Thiel's Fixation on the End Times

By a Recovering Armstrongist follower

Bob Thiel has begun the first of a two-year project on subjecting his followers to his interpretation of the Book of Revelation. 

Typical of Armstrongist prophecy, he follows a stubbornly familiar pattern. Decades pass, predictions fail, and Herbert W. Armstrong's religious empire breaks into ever more splinter groups-yet the underlying formula barely changes.

Germany is on its way. The Great Tribulation draws near, and the Beast is getting ready to rise. The Church will have to endure. Before everything collapses, its members had better be certain they obey the right man.

Enter Crackpot Bob (affectionately called Bwana Bob by his African followers) with another installment from Armstrongism's end-times entertainment industry.

Apparently, Jesus Christ's gospel needs extra drama: a German invasion, a European dictator, horrifying prophetic scenarios, and a congregation fretting over whether its obedience will spare it from the worst. 

Welcome to the Continuing Church of God's prophetic-anxiety department. Bring your Bible, emergency supplies, and checkbook. The end is near. Again.

Armstrongism's most troubling feature may be the way it turns biblical prophecy into a tool for controlling believers.

The point is not merely to make Christians think about the future. Prophecy keeps catastrophe feeling close at hand, while suggesting that members' spiritual survival depends on their loyalty to the organization and its leaders.

The formula works with striking consistency: take a frightening event, tie it to a prophetic passage, and present it as proof that the organization's interpretation was right. Members are then urged to stay faithful and obedient, while being reminded that the Great Tribulation is still coming. But what happens when the prediction fails to unfold as expected? Never mind. Another prophecy is always available.

The issue is not Christians talking about Revelation. It begins when someone turns it into a threat, leaving people constantly afraid that they may not stand right with God. Paul described a very different promise in the New Covenant:

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." 2 Timothy 1:7, KJV

A sound mind?

That idea seems awkward for an organization whose prophetic interpretation appears to depend on keeping its members in a constant state of alarm.

The Christian life should rest on faith, hope, love, and confidence in Christ-not on constant anxiety over whether the newest political shift in Europe signals the collapse of your spiritual life. Which brings us to the Germans, Armstrongism's preferred villains of the end times.

Armstrongism has long been drawn to the idea of a revived European empire. In Herbert W. Armstrong's prophetic framework, Germany and a broader European power stood at the heart of the coming Beast system. Over time, that reading sank so deeply into the movement's thinking that several generations of members interpreted European politics as signs of an approaching catastrophe.

Germany became more than a country; it turned into a prophetic fixation.

Want to understand the European Union, military cooperation across Europe, a new political leader, a financial crisis, or a dispute between European nations? Watch Germany. Somewhere, an Armstrongist prophecy enthusiast is likely scanning the latest German headlines and muttering, "This could be it!"

That is the absurd part: the prophetic narrative can absorb almost any development.

Whatever happens, the Armstrongist prophecy industry can claim vindication. A stronger Europe fulfills the prophecy; a weaker Europe does too. Germany's leadership counts as confirmation, while its failure to lead merely means the prophecy is waiting for the right moment. The only outcome that might genuinely surprise them is Germany remaining an ordinary country while the world ignores the organization's carefully constructed prophetic timetable.

What does the New Covenant say about this fixation? Jesus did not send His followers into the world to become professional German-watchers. He sent them to make disciples, love their neighbors, proclaim the gospel, and remain faithful.

Matthew 28:18-20 records the Great Commission. It does not say:

Go therefore, and monitor the German economy, the European Parliament, and every political development that might conceivably resemble Daniel's fourth beast.

Revelation was never meant to leave Christians terrified about what lies ahead. The book's real purpose deserves a closer look.

The opening verses identify this as a revelation from Jesus Christ. Its subject is not Germany, Crackpot Bob's interpretations, or the newest prophetic reading from an Armstrongist leader. The focus is Jesus Christ.

Revelation 1:1 begins:

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass."

What, then, does John say when he sees Christ glorified? He collapses at Christ's feet. Jesus answers him:

Fear not; I am the first and the last. Revelation 1:17, KJV

The contrast is striking.

Armstrongist prophecy teachers often use this book to frighten people, yet it opens with the risen Christ telling John not to fear.

Revelation's final message is not a warning that Christians must fear the Beast.

The Lamb wins. Evil will not have the last word. God's kingdom will prevail, and Christ's people are called to remain faithful to him.

That stands far apart from the endless Armstrongist refrain: "The end is near. Germany is rising. Make sure you belong to the right organization."

Christ has already accomplished what Armstrongism keeps turning into a test.

Armstrongist theology repeatedly makes organizational obedience overshadow the believer's relationship with God. Yet the New Covenant rests on Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 8:6 says:

But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

A better covenant.

Better promises.

A better mediator.

Not another set of predictions meant to provoke fear. Not an institution that expects blind loyalty. And not a religious survival plan that keeps warning its members they may suffer because their obedience has fallen short.

The New Covenant rests on what Jesus Christ has already completed. Paul writes in Romans 8:1:

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus.

That statement is remarkable.

No condemnation.

Not with a condition attached-such as correctly naming the next European dictator. And not on the condition that you stay loyal enough to Bob Thiel, Sam Kitchen, Dave Pack, Gerald Flurry, or any other COG minister or leader. Believers place their confidence in Christ.

Christians are not thereby excused from responsible living. The New Covenant calls believers to holiness, love, obedience, and good works-but these grow out of a changed life; they do not buy spiritual protection from an impending prophetic disaster.

Ephesians 2:8-10 draws the line clearly.

Salvation comes through grace by faith, not through anything we accomplish. Yet believers are created in Christ Jesus for good works.

That order matters: grace comes first, and Christ comes first. Christian living grows out of that relationship.

Armstrongism reverses that order: spiritual security becomes tied to obedience to its own reading of biblical law and prophecy. No wonder its members are afraid.

Will members who have sinned face the Great Tribulation? That question exposes a troubling part of the Armstrongist prophetic system.

Armstrongist circles often suggest that members who fall short of sufficient faithfulness could face the coming Great Tribulation. The nations and the wider world will suffer, and those who have not obeyed properly may suffer with them.

The New Covenant does not promise Christians protection from every catastrophe to come merely because they belong to the right organization. Nor does it say that suffering proves a Christian has failed a spiritual test. Jesus rejected that simplistic explanation outright.

In Luke 13:1-5, Jesus challenged the idea that tragedy proves a person's spiritual failure. Rather than speculate about who deserved such suffering, He urged His listeners to repent.

In John 9:1-3, Jesus challenged the belief that the man's suffering had to come from his own sin or from his parents' sins.

The New Covenant does not authorize religious leaders to explain every tragedy as proof of someone else's spiritual failure. Nor does it permit them to frighten members with the claim that any terrible event means they could be next.

Christians have never been strangers to suffering. The apostles endured it, as did the early church, and believers across history have faced it too.

Believing in Christ does not promise a life without suffering. Romans 8:35-39 states the point plainly: no hardship can cut believers off from God's love.

Paul never says Christians will avoid tribulation. His claim is different: nothing can sever believers from God's love in Christ Jesus. That is the hope of the New Covenant.

It does not rest on belonging to the right organization or finding some prophetic way out.

Let's be honest. Fear is a powerful motivator.

People may silence their own questions, put up with harmful leaders, and stay committed despite serious doubts when they believe disaster awaits anyone who leaves a particular religious organization.

The Great Tribulation can be used as a spiritual leash.

Question the leader, and you may be told that you are abandoning God's true church. Leave the organization, and the warning may shift to the loss of spiritual protection. Challenge the latest prophetic interpretation, and your faithfulness itself may be called into question.

Already worried about your salvation? There is another prophecy waiting to trouble you. That creates a system where religious anxiety keeps feeding itself.

The member fears what lies ahead, while the organization supplies an explanation. Reassurance then comes from the same source that keeps interpreting the future, making the member increasingly dependent on it.

What a convenient arrangement. Only a subscription service is missing.

Perhaps Bwana Bob could call it:

The Great Tribulation Survival Package: Monthly Prophecy Updates, Spiritual Anxiety, and Premium German Watching.

Yes, it's satire. The issue underneath it isn't.

The New Covenant calls believers to freedom in Christ.

Galatians 5:1 says:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

That freedom does not release anyone from love, responsibility, or holiness. Christ has broken the condemnation and bondage that once held people captive; believers are also free from religious systems that try to bind them again through fear.

The Gospel is not an end-time emergency broadcast!

One tragic result of Armstrongist fixation on prophecy is that it can bury the gospel itself. Jesus announced the kingdom of God, calling people to repent and receive forgiveness while showing mercy and restoring humanity's relationship with God. He healed the sick and welcomed sinners. His followers were told to love one another-even their enemies-and He gave His life to save the world.

Yet in the Armstrongist prophetic universe, the message can end up sounding like this:

"Look at Germany!"

"Look at Europe!"

"Look at the Beast!"

"Look at the coming tribulation!"

"Look at the latest prophetic development!"

Eventually, the question becomes unavoidable: where is Jesus in all of this? Not Jesus reduced to a prophetic symbol or placed somewhere on a future timeline, but Jesus as the living Savior, mediator of the New Covenant, and the source of believers' hope.

The apostle Paul wrote:

For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. 1 Corinthians 2:2, KJV

That verse creates an awkward problem for a religious movement with an apparently endless interest in prophetic speculation. Paul kept his message centered on Christ crucified.

His sacrifice established the New Covenant, while His resurrection gives believers their hope. Christian life rests on faith in Him.

Germany is not where the gospel centers. Nor is Bob Thiel. The Continuing Church of God does not stand at its heart. Jesus Christ does.

The Final Irony: Revelation Ends with Hope, Not Bob Thiel

The book of Revelation ends with God's victory over evil and the promise that creation will be made new.

Revelation 21:4 declares:

And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain.

That is the Christian hope in its fullest sense.

It is not endless terror or a life spent fearing what comes next. Nor does it require constant doubt over whether someone has correctly identified the next prophetic development.

Through Jesus Christ, God will restore all things. Revelation 22:17 extends the invitation:

The Spirit and the bride say, 'Come.' Let anyone who hears them repeat the invitation. If you are thirsty, come; whoever wishes may take the water of life freely.

Freely.

That is the language of grace.

The water of life is not a prize for reading European politics correctly, nor for surviving a religious organization's endless prophetic trials.

It is given freely. That alone sets the New Covenant apart from the Armstrongist fear machine.

The world's problems are real. So is war. So is suffering. And human sin is real.

Christians should take Jesus' teachings seriously. Still, biblical prophecy should not be used to frighten people or control an organization, as though it held the answer to the world's problems.

The answer is found in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Through the New Covenant, believers receive forgiveness and reconciliation, along with the freedom and hope to live differently. They are called to love God and their neighbors, remaining faithful in the present instead of getting lost in speculation about the future. Their confidence rests on Christ-not on predictions made by religious leaders.

Crackpot Bob, watch Germany if you insist. Study European politics. Make your prophetic videos. Just stop presenting your reading of the future as though it were the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The New Covenant does not offer a plan for surviving a German invasion. Nor does it ask believers to live on a subscription of religious fear or keep proving that they deserve God's protection.

The gospel is good news: Jesus Christ has done for sinful humanity what it could never do on its own.

Revelation's final message is not the Beast's victory.

The Lamb wins.

The Germans are not the gospel; neither are the Great Tribulation or Bob Thiel's words.

Jesus Christ is.

When Genealogy, Zechariah, Armstrongism, and Samuel Kitchen Collide in a Perfect Storm of Spiritual Self-Importance

There is a fascinating phenomenon that appears again and again in Armstrongism, thanks to its structure that is built around authoritarian personalities: eventually someone discovers that God's entire prophetic plan somehow points directly to them. This is how we have been blessed by such luminaries as Bob Thiel, Dave Pack, and Gerald Flurry.

Now, Samuel W. Kitchen has discovered, by the rigorous method of rearranging the letters in his own surname until they look vaguely biblical, that the post office should be forwarding the tithes of the faithful to him. He is, he assures us, of the house of Josiah-Hen, descendant of Zerubbabel and of Joseph of Arimathea, co-heir with Herbert W. Armstrong of the Siward Bjorn line, and therefore the authorized recipient of gold, silver, and the three tithes that will restore the temple and rebuke the devourer. The rest of us are building in Babylon. Please make the check payable to the man whose kitchen is named for Christ.

The pattern is almost predictable.

First, someone finds an obscure biblical passage. Then they connect it to a mysterious family lineage. Then they announce that their ancestry proves they possess a special role in God's plan. Finally, the conclusion arrives right on schedule:

You should recognize their authority and support their ministry financially.

It is a remarkable theological system. Thousands of years of biblical history, genealogies, prophecies, and symbolism all somehow end up pointing to one modern individual with a donation button.

Convenient, isn't it? This is the main reason for the existence of Armstrongism - the donation button.

Armstrongism has set the perfect example for Samuel. The claim he is promoting is that he can trace a family connection through Joseph of Arimathea, Zerubbabel, Herbert W. Armstrong, and ancient Israelite lines, thereby inheriting some kind of spiritual authority connected with Zechariah 6.

The problem is that Scripture does not establish such a mechanism.

Zechariah 6 is dealing with a specific historical situation involving the post-exilic period after the Babylonian captivity. Zerubbabel was a governor of Judah during the rebuilding of the temple, and Joshua the high priest was involved in the symbolic coronation described in the passage.

The passage does not say:

Thousands of years later, find someone with a similar-sounding surname, trace questionable genealogies, and then send him money because he occupies Zerubbabel's seat.

That interpretation requires a very creative imagination.

A little too creative.

It turns biblical prophecy into something resembling an ancient treasure map where the final clue mysteriously leads to someone's personal ministry account.

Armstrongism is based upon word associations, whether in British Israelism or proof of a leader's calling. Samuel does this exact same thing.

Start with the name. "Kitchen" is a Middle English occupational surname from cycene, the room where the food was cooked. It is not "Kit" plus "Chen." "Kit" is not Hebrew for "supporter of Christ." "Hen" and "Chen" are the same Hebrew root meaning grace or favor; they are not a secret family crest waiting for a twentieth-century American to notice that his last name ends in similar sounds. Josiah means "Yahweh supports" or "Yahweh heals," depending on the etymology one prefers; it does not mean "send money to anyone surnamed Kitchen." If surname puns conferred priesthood, every Baker would be entitled to the showbread and every Smith would be forging the covenant.

The biblical text he cites does not say what he needs it to say. Zechariah 6:9-15 records a symbolic act in the days of the return from Babylon. Gold and silver brought by Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah are made into crowns and set on the head of Joshua the high priest. The prophet is told to go to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah for the purpose of that ceremony. The crowns are then kept as a memorial in the temple. The speech that follows is about "the Branch," who will build the temple of the Lord, bear the glory, and sit as priest on his throne. That Branch is not Zerubbabel's distant cousin who will one day incorporate in the United States. Christian readers, from the New Testament onward, have identified the Branch with the Messiah. The house of Josiah is the location of a one-time prophetic sign-act, not a perpetual clearinghouse for tithes whose mailing address updates whenever a man named Kitchen feels led.

This argument follows a familiar pattern found throughout Armstrong-related splinter groups.

The original movement centered heavily on the idea that God was working through a specially appointed human leader. After Herbert W. Armstrong's death, numerous groups emerged, often claiming that they preserved the true work, the true message, or the true authority.

The common thread is always the same: Everyone else lost the truth. God has restored it here. And naturally, the person making that claim is usually the one standing in the restored position.

What are the odds? Apparently, in these movements, the odds are very good.

Every generation seems to produce someone who discovers that the prophetic baton conveniently landed in their own hands.

Zerubbabel himself was the Persian-appointed governor who led a return and began the second temple. His line is traced in the genealogies of Matthew and Luke because those genealogies are interested in the ancestry of Jesus, not in establishing a continuing civil or ecclesiastical office that survives the fall of the temple, the end of the Levitical system, and the arrival of the new covenant. Hebrews is inconveniently clear that the earthly sanctuary and its regulations were copies and shadows, that Christ is the high priest of a better covenant, and that the old order is obsolete. There is no vacant "seat of Zerubbabel" for a modern claimant to occupy. The governor's work was finished when the temple was built and, later, when that temple was superseded.

The Joseph of Arimathea myth is legend stacked on legend. The Gospels say he was a rich member of the council, a disciple, who obtained the body of Jesus and laid it in his own tomb. Medieval British tradition, much of it late and pious, turned him into the uncle of Mary, the bearer of the Grail, the founder of Glastonbury, and the ancestor of British royalty. British-Israel and Armstrongite writers adopted the tale because it helped them connect the throne of David to the British Isles. None of this is history that can be audited. No continuous, documented pedigree runs from a first-century Judean counselor through Dark Age Britain, Siward Bjorn, the Armstrongs, and a Kitchen family in such a way that a living man can produce the records and say, "Here is the chain; here is the office." Even if every link were real, blood would not confer the right to collect Christian offerings. The New Testament never once treats descent from David, from Zerubbabel, or from any Sanhedrin member as a qualification for ministry or for the receipt of money. Paul, who could boast of his Hebrew pedigree when it suited an argument, refused to do so as a ground of authority.

Armstrong's own movement already illustrates the problem. Herbert W. Armstrong claimed unique insight, the Philadelphia mantle, and the right to the tithe that would finish the work before the place of safety. After his death, the church split, resplit, and resplit again. Each fragment has tended to discover that the true continuation runs through its own leader, its own literature, and its own bank account. Kitchen's version simply adds a family-tree flourish and insists that reorganization is apostasy while his own private claim is restoration. The pattern is familiar: one man, one work, one place the money must go, and a warning that refusal means missing the kingdom.

The most concerning aspect of these claims is not merely unusual interpretations of prophecy. It is what often follows: A demand for recognition, loyalty, and financial support.

The argument becomes: "God has appointed me." Therefore: "You must support what God is doing through me."

But this creates a serious biblical question: Where did Jesus tell His followers to locate a modern individual claiming inherited prophetic authority and send money to him?

Where did Jesus instruct Christians to verify someone's spiritual legitimacy through genealogy?

Where did the apostles tell believers: Search carefully through ancient family records until you find the person occupying Zerubbabel's seat?

They did not.

Instead, the New Testament repeatedly emphasizes faithfulness to Christ, humility, service, and spiritual fruit.

Jesus warned about religious leaders who sought honor and special status. He taught that greatness in God's kingdom is demonstrated through serving others, not through claiming elevated rank.

Another recurring Armstrong teaching is the idea that a specific organization represents the continuation of the Philadelphia era of Revelation.

This creates another theological dilemma: If every splinter group claims to be the continuation of the true Philadelphia work, how many Philadelphia works are there?

Apparently, the Philadelphia candlestick has multiplied like loaves and fishes.

Each group says:

"We are the faithful remnant."

Each claims:

"Others have fallen away."

Each suggests:

"Support us because this is where God is working."

At some point, a reasonable Christian has to ask:

Is this actually biblical restoration - or simply an endless cycle of people claiming spiritual inheritance from previous claimants?

New-covenant Christians have specific reasons to decline the invitation. The tithe of the Mosaic law was tied to the land, the Levites, the temple, and the festivals of Israel. The New Testament nowhere reimposes that statute on Gentile churches or on Jewish believers in Christ. What it does teach is voluntary, cheerful giving for the support of those who labor in the gospel, for the poor, and for the needs of the saints. That giving is not a test of whether one has found the correct descendant of Josiah-Hen. It is not the mechanism by which the devourer is rebuked, and the European clay is broken. Malachi 3 addresses a covenant people who were robbing God under the Levitical system; it is not a collection letter for every later claimant who can quote it. Revelation 12 describes the woman's flight and the dragon's rage; it does not name a treasurer.

Authority in the church, on the apostolic witness, rests on the gospel itself, on faithfulness to the apostles' teaching, and on the recognition of the congregation, not on a surname, a medieval pedigree, a self-appointed upstart, someone who had some dreams and nightmares, or a private assurance that Christ has added one to an office the text never created. A man may be sincere, industrious, and convinced. Sincerity does not turn Zechariah's memorial crowns into a standing order for his household. The Branch has already come. The temple he builds is not financed by locating the right Kitchen. 

The Christian message has never been:

"Find the man with the right genealogy."

It has always been:

"Follow Christ."

And thankfully, following Christ does not require locating a modern Zerubbabel, decoding someone's surname, or sending money to someone who claims heaven's endorsement.

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

Quoted below, as Samuel wrote it:

With Zerubbabel, they carried out the tithes and offerings, the gold and silver, and brought it to the House of God. 

In Zechariah 6:10-15, we read: 

Take of them of the captivity, even of Heldai, of Tobijah, and of Jedaiah, which are come from Babylon, and come thou the same day, and go into the house of Josiah the son of Zephaniah; 

 

Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest; 

And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The Branch; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord: 

Even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

And the crowns shall be to Helem, and to Tobijah, and to Jedaiah, and to Hen the son of Zephaniah, for a memorial in the temple of the Lord.

And they that are far off shall come and build in the temple of the Lord, and ye shall know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto you. And this shall come to pass, if ye will diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God. 

The HOUSE that receives the tithes and offerings, is called "Josiah-Hen". That is WHO IS AUTHORIZED. That is where Zerubbabel is! 

In fact, this is my family line. I can trace my lineage back to Joseph of Arimathew, back to Zerubbabel. 

My family is Kit-chen. Josiah means "supporter of Yah" Kit means "Supporter of Christ" 

Hen and Chen is the same Hebrew word. 

Herbert W Armstrong is a descendant of this same family line!! His line was surnamed ARMSTRONG through Siward Bjourn! I am a direct descendant of Siward Bjourn too! And We are the House of HEN. 

Zerubbabel was of that same house. Because in Zechariah 6, God says to give gold and silver to the house of Josiah-Hen the son of Zephaniah! By the three tithes, the Temple shall be restored! Notice it is three men that are taken to go to this specific house! 

How will the coming United States of Europe break up? Through the obedience of the CLAY or ISRAELITE NATIONS among them! Who will God use to do that? The same individual who shall do the same with these camps of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram! Jesus Christ will do it through ONE MAN. 

Because notice in Malachi 3 the DEVOURER is REBUKED. Satan will be rebuked! Now notice Revelation 12:13-17! How is Satan and his armies REBUKED! 

Now notice Zechariah 3, and Satan is rebuked. IT TIES DIRECTLY TO ZECHARIAH 6 and the house mentioned! 

This is about the Philadelphia elect GOING TO A PLACE OF SAFETY! 

Those who obey God in bringing Tithes and Offerings to those restoring the Philadlephia Candlestick, the Worldwide Church of God! Not another church. Not re-organized as a new thing as these groups have. 

BUT SPIRITUALLY ORGANIZED AS CHRIST ORGANIZED THROUGH HERBERT W ARMSTRONG! This is NOT MY CHURCH! 

But I have been added to it by the Hand of Jesus Christ! I have received authority from Christ, and even the Bible backs me up by pointing out my family line and the family line of Herbert W Armstrong! 

Us being of that line gives us no promise of position in the Church. But because AUTHORITY HAS BEEN GIVEN, we ought to OBEY GOD, and get back of HIS WORK. And stop this support of Babylon. Because the House of God will be built! and all these other houses will fall. 

This is about getting the Bride ready! It is a TEST ON US! God is watching us to see who is serving HIM, and who is just building in Babylon. 

I hope you realize your calling brethren! We will not enter the kingdom of God, any other way! 

In Jesus Christ's name, 

Samuel W Kitchen

From Armstrongism to Hebrew Roots: The Untold Story of a Religious Family Tree

From Armstrongism to Hebrew Roots: 

The Untold Story of a Religious Family Tree

The modern Hebrew Roots movement is often described as having emerged from Armstrongism. There is considerable truth in that description, but the actual history is more fascinating than a simple "Armstrongism became Hebrew Roots" explanation suggests.

Hebrew Roots did not spring from a single founder, denomination, or moment in history. Instead, it developed through the convergence of several religious traditions: the Sabbatarian Church of God movement, Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God, the Sacred Name movement, Messianic Judaism, and a growing interest among Christians in returning to what they regarded as the Hebrew and biblical foundations of the faith.

The dramatic doctrinal transformation of the Worldwide Church of God after the death of Herbert Armstrong in 1986 provided an especially important catalyst. Thousands of former members suddenly found themselves outside the church in which they had learned to observe the seventh-day Sabbath and biblical festivals. Some joined other Church of God organizations. Others encountered Sacred Name groups, Messianic Judaism, and eventually the emerging Hebrew Roots movement.

The story of the House of Yahweh in Texas provides an intriguing window into this larger history. Although the House of Yahweh should not simply be classified as a Hebrew Roots organization, its history demonstrates how closely the Armstrongite, Sabbatarian, Sacred Name, and Torah-observant worlds could overlap.

Armstrongism: Preparing the Ground

To understand the rise of Hebrew Roots, it is necessary to understand what made Armstrongism so unusual within twentieth-century American Christianity. Herbert W. Armstrong's Radio Church of God, later renamed the Worldwide Church of God, developed a distinctive theology that challenged many conventional Christian practices.

Armstrong taught his followers to observe the seventh-day Sabbath, rather than Sunday. His churches celebrated the biblical annual festivals-including Passover, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, the Feast of Tabernacles, and the Last Great Day. The church also rejected Christmas and Easter as non-biblical traditions and maintained Old Testament dietary distinctions. For many Americans raised in conventional Protestant or Catholic Christianity, these teachings were startling.

Armstrongism essentially asked a question that would later become central to Hebrew Roots:

What if Christianity had moved away from many of the practices found in the Bible?

That question became fundamental to Armstrong's restorationist theology.

Armstrong taught that God had restored biblical truths that had been lost or obscured by traditional Christianity. His followers therefore came to see themselves not merely as another Protestant denomination but as participants in a restoration of original Christianity.

This provided fertile ground for what would later become Hebrew Roots.

The Questions Were Already Being Asked

By the time the Hebrew Roots movement began gaining visibility, former Armstrongites were already accustomed to asking questions such as:

• Why does Christianity worship on Sunday?
• Why aren't Christians keeping the biblical Holy Days?
• Why did Christmas and Easter replace the biblical festivals?
• Did Jesus and the apostles keep the Sabbath?
• Are the Old Testament dietary laws still relevant?
• What did the earliest followers of Jesus actually believe?
• How much of Christianity came from the Hebrew Scriptures?
• Did later Christianity lose something important from its biblical foundation?

These were not new questions. Armstrongism had already placed them at the center of religious discussion for thousands of its members.

That is one reason the later emergence of Hebrew Roots found such a receptive audience among some former Worldwide Church of God members.

• They didn't have to be convinced that the Sabbath mattered
• They were already keeping it
• They didn't have to be persuaded that the biblical festivals were important
• They had already spent years celebrating them

The question simply shifted from "What did Armstrong teach?" to "What does the Bible actually teach, and what was the faith of the earliest believers?" That distinction would become enormously important.

Armstrongism Wasn't the Whole Story

It would be a mistake to portray Hebrew Roots as simply a renamed version of Armstrongism.

Another important stream was already developing independently: the Sacred Name movement. Sacred Name groups placed particular emphasis on restoring what they believed was the proper Hebrew name of God, generally rendered Yahweh, and frequently used a Hebrew form of Jesus' name such as Yahshua. Many Sacred Name groups also observed the Sabbath and biblical festivals and maintained various elements of Old Testament law. In other words, there were already Christians outside Armstrongism who were pursuing many of the same biblical practices.

This means the historical picture is less like a straight line and more like a series of streams flowing toward one another.

One stream:

Sabbatarian Christianity → Armstrongism → Worldwide Church of God → post-Armstrong splintering

Another:

Sacred Name movement → Yahweh/Yahshua emphasis → Torah observance

Another:

Messianic Judaism → Jewish context of Jesus and the apostles → Torah-observant Christianity

Eventually these streams began overlapping. And that convergence helped produce the modern Hebrew Roots movement.

The Earthquake: Armstrong's Death and the Transformation of the Worldwide Church of God

The most important event in this story was the death of Herbert W. Armstrong in 1986.

Armstrong had spent decades building the Worldwide Church of God around a distinctive theological system. After his death, however, the church began undergoing major doctrinal changes. Under Joseph W. Tkach and later his son, the Worldwide Church of God increasingly abandoned many of Armstrong's distinctive teachings.

• British-Israelism was rejected.
• The church changed its teachings about the nature of God and salvation.
• The Sabbath and annual Holy Days were no longer required.
• Tithing doctrines changed.
• The church increasingly embraced mainstream evangelical Christianity.

For many members, this was not a minor theological adjustment. It was a revolution.

People who had spent decades believing that Saturday was the biblical Sabbath were suddenly being told that Christians were not obligated to keep it. People who had celebrated the biblical festivals were told that they were not requirements for Christians. The old doctrinal structure was collapsing. And thousands of people left.

The Armstrongite Diaspora

The result was one of the most remarkable episodes of fragmentation in modern American religious history.

Former Worldwide Church of God members scattered in numerous directions. Some joined or established organizations that attempted to preserve Armstrong's teachings. Among the resulting groups were organizations such as the United Church of God, Living Church of God, Philadelphia Church of God, Church of the Great God, and numerous smaller independent congregations.

But not everyone remained within the traditional Church of God world. Some former members began exploring other approaches to the Bible.

They encountered:

• Messianic Judaism.
• Sacred Name ministries.
• Torah-observant Christians.
• Independent Sabbath-keeping congregations.
• Hebrew Roots teachers and publications.

For someone who had spent years studying the Sabbath and Holy Days, these movements could seem remarkably familiar. But they offered something different.

Instead of saying, "This is what Herbert Armstrong taught," they asked: What did the Hebrew Scriptures actually say? What did Jesus and the apostles actually practice?

The birth of modern Hebrew Roots

The Hebrew Roots movement began emerging as a recognizable phenomenon during the late 1980s and 1990s. This period is important because it was precisely when the old Armstrongite world was breaking apart.

Former Worldwide Church of God members encountered other Torah-observant Christians. Some encountered Sacred Name groups. Others encountered Messianic Jewish congregations. Still others independently began studying Hebrew, Jewish background, the biblical festivals and the Torah.

The result was a movement that did not have a single founder. Instead, it consisted of networks of teachers, congregations, magazines, ministries and independent Bible-study groups.

One important development was the work of Dean and Susan Wheelock, who obtained a federal trademark for the term "Hebrew Roots" in 1994 and later published Hebrew Roots magazine. Other teachers, including Batya Wootten, were developing related ideas concerning the identity and restoration of Israel during the same period.

Some participants came from Armstrongite backgrounds. Others came from Messianic Judaism. Some came from Sacred Name organizations. Others came from evangelical churches and independently discovered Torah observance.

The movement therefore became a convergence point.

• One person might arrive because of the Sabbath.
• Another because of the biblical festivals.
• Another because of the Hebrew names of God.
• Another because of an interest in the Jewish background of Jesus.
• Another because of dissatisfaction with traditional Christian holidays.
• They could arrive at the same conference from completely different religious backgrounds.

What Armstrongism Contributed

Armstrongism's influence on this developing movement was particularly significant in several areas.

1. The Sabbath: Armstrong had already convinced hundreds of thousands of people that the seventh-day Sabbath was still relevant to Christians. For former members, Sabbath observance wasn't a new discovery.

2. The biblical festivals: The Worldwide Church of God had taught an annual cycle of biblical festivals for decades. Former members already knew the significance of Passover, Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles, and the Last Great Day.

3. Biblical dietary laws: Armstrongites were familiar with the distinction between clean and unclean animals described in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

4. Rejection of Christmas and Easter: Armstrong's followers had long been taught that these traditional Christian holidays were not commanded in Scripture.

5. Restorationism: Perhaps most importantly, Armstrongism provided a framework for believing that mainstream Christianity had lost important biblical truths.

This restorationist mindset became one of the bridges into Hebrew Roots. But Hebrew Roots went beyond Armstrong.

The emerging Hebrew Roots movement also departed from Armstrong's theological system in important ways. One major difference was the growing emphasis on Hebrew language and Jewish historical context. Many Hebrew Roots teachers became interested in the Judaism of the Second Temple period, the Hebrew language, Jewish interpretations of Scripture, and the cultural world in which Jesus and the apostles lived. This could lead to conclusions quite different from those taught by Armstrong.

The movement also contained considerable diversity concerning prophecy, salvation, the nature of God, Israel, the law, and the identity of the modern Jewish people.

Some participants retained ideas inherited from Armstrongism. Others rejected them.

Some adopted Sacred Name theology. Others did not.

Some identified closely with Messianic Judaism. Others deliberately distinguished themselves from it.

Consequently, Hebrew Roots cannot accurately be reduced to Armstrongism with Hebrew terminology added. It was a new synthesis.

Enter the House of Yahweh

One of the most fascinating organizations to examine in this history is the House of Yahweh in Texas. The House of Yahweh is generally better understood as part of the Sacred Name/Sabbatarian tradition rather than simply as a Hebrew Roots organization. Its history, however, reveals just how interconnected these religious worlds could become.

The movement associated with Yisrayl Hawkins developed in Texas and placed extraordinary emphasis on the biblical name Yahweh, Torah observance, the Sabbath, the annual Holy Days, and biblical prophecy.

The organization's history traces its development through the Hawkins brothers and their religious work. And there is an important Armstrongite connection.

Yisrayl Hawkins and the Worldwide Church of God

Before becoming associated with the House of Yahweh, Yisrayl Hawkins had a connection with the Worldwide Church of God in Abilene, Texas. Accounts of his early history describe him as having participated in the local WCG congregation, including serving as a song leader.

His religious path subsequently intersected with that of his brother, J. G. Hawkins, who had developed an interest in the Hebrew name of God. That connection is historically significant.

It demonstrates that the relationship between Armstrongism and Sacred Name religion wasn't merely an abstract similarity in doctrine.

There were actual people moving through these communities. They carried ideas with them. They maintained some teachings while abandoning others. They encountered new teachers and new interpretations. This is precisely how religious movements evolve.

The Sacred Name Becomes Central

The Hawkins movement placed far greater emphasis on the name Yahweh than Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God had. The organization also uses Yahshua in referring to the Messiah.

This Sacred Name emphasis distinguishes the House of Yahweh from most traditional Armstrongite organizations. Armstrong himself generally used the conventional English terminology of his era rather than making the restoration of Hebrew names the central issue.

The House of Yahweh therefore illustrates something important: A person could leave the Armstrongite world without abandoning Sabbath and Torah observance, while simultaneously adopting an entirely different theological framework. That is precisely the sort of religious cross-pollination that eventually characterized the wider Hebrew Roots environment.

The Two Witnesses

Another distinctive feature of the House of Yahweh is its interpretation of the Two Witnesses described in Revelation 11. The Hawkins tradition developed a strong prophetic identification involving the leadership of the movement and the biblical Two Witnesses. This represents another point of contact with the broader Armstrongite environment.

Armstrongism had always been deeply interested in biblical prophecy. World events were frequently interpreted through prophetic passages. The identity of Israel, end-time events, the return of Christ, and the coming Kingdom of God were central themes.

The House of Yahweh inherited the same kind of intense prophetic atmosphere, although its specific interpretations were different. n this respect, the two movements shared a common religious vocabulary while reaching different conclusions.

Why Texas Matters

The Texas connection is more than a geographical curiosity. Texas became an important center for several independent religious movements, and the Abilene area became particularly significant in the history of the House of Yahweh.

It is also an interesting example of how religious movements that might appear unrelated from the outside could occupy the same regional religious landscape.

A former Armstrongite in Texas could encounter:

• a Church of God congregation,
• a Sacred Name group,
• an independent Sabbath-keeping church,
• a Messianic congregation,
• or eventually a Hebrew Roots ministry.

The boundaries between these communities were not always as clear to individual believers as they appear in retrospect.

A Family Tree Rather Than a Straight Line

The easiest way to misunderstand this history is to imagine a straight line:

Armstrongism → Hebrew Roots

The actual history looks more like this:

Sabbatarian Christianity

↓

Church of God traditions

↓

Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God

↓

Post-1986 fragmentation

↙ ↓ ↘

Armstrongite churches - Messianic Judaism - Hebrew Roots

At the same time:

Sacred Name movement

↓

Yahweh/Yahshua + Torah + Sabbath + Holy Days

↓

House of Yahweh and related groups

And eventually these different streams began intersecting.

Why Former Armstrongites Were Particularly Receptive

There is a fascinating sociological element to the story.

Imagine someone who had spent twenty or thirty years as a member of the Worldwide Church of God.

They had been taught that:

• Sunday worship was wrong.
• Saturday was the Sabbath.
• Christmas and Easter were not biblical festivals.
• God's annual Holy Days were important.
• Biblical dietary laws still had significance.
• The Old Testament was essential to understanding the New Testament.
• Christianity had departed from the practices of the early church.

Then the church changes its theology. Suddenly, the person is confronted with the possibility that the institution they trusted had been wrong.

What happens next?

Some people follow the institution.

Others follow Armstrong.

Others follow the Bible as they understand it.

And still others begin asking an even more fundamental question:

What existed before all these modern denominations? That question can lead directly into Hebrew Roots.

The Search for the "Original" Faith

One of the strongest themes connecting Armstrongism and Hebrew Roots is the desire to recover what is perceived as the original faith of the apostles.

• Armstrong taught restoration.
• Hebrew Roots teachers frequently teach restoration.
• Sacred Name groups teach restoration.
• Messianic Jewish movements often emphasize recovering the Jewish context of the first-century faith.

The terminology differs, but the underlying impulse can be remarkably similar:

Something important was lost, and believers should recover it.

Where the movements differ is in what they believe was lost and how it should be restored.

For Armstrong, the restoration involved a broad system of doctrines concerning the Kingdom of God, biblical prophecy, God's plan for humanity, Israel, Sabbath and Holy Day observance, and numerous other teachings.

For Hebrew Roots adherents, the restoration is more often centered around Torah, the Hebrew Scriptures, the Jewish context of the Messiah, biblical festivals, Sabbath observance, and the relationship between the Old and New Testaments.

For Sacred Name groups, restoring the divine name can become a central component.

These aren't identical restoration projects. But they inhabit the same religious neighborhood.

The House of Yahweh as a Case Study

This is why the House of Yahweh deserves attention when examining the history of Hebrew Roots.

It illustrates three things simultaneously.

• First, Torah observance did not originate with Hebrew Roots. Sabbatarian and Sacred Name groups were practicing these things long before the modern Hebrew Roots movement acquired its present identity.
• Second, Armstrongism wasn't the only source of these ideas. The Sacred Name movement represents an independent stream with its own history.
• Third, the different movements interacted. People such as Yisrayl Hawkins demonstrate that an individual could move through the Armstrongite and Sacred Name worlds, absorbing elements of both.

That makes the House of Yahweh a fascinating case study in the cross-pollination of restorationist Christianity.

From Splinter Churches to the Internet

There was another factor that accelerated all of this: the Internet.

During the 1990s, former members of the Worldwide Church of God were already producing newsletters, magazines, books, cassette recordings, radio programs and independent ministries. Then the Internet transformed everything.

A person who previously might have known only one Sabbatarian congregation could suddenly discover hundreds.

A former WCG member could search for:

Sabbath.

Then:

Torah.

Then:

Hebrew Roots.

Then:

Yahweh.

Then:

Messianic Judaism.

Within hours, they could encounter ideas that would previously have taken years to discover.

This greatly accelerated the blending of religious traditions.

A Movement Without a Single Center

Today, "Hebrew Roots" can mean very different things depending upon whom one is talking about.

• Some adherents are relatively close to Messianic Judaism.
• Some emphasize Torah observance while maintaining conventional Christian terminology.
• Some insist upon the use of Hebrew names.
• Some reject traditional Christian holidays but do not use Sacred Name terminology.
• Some retain ideas inherited from the old Church of God movement.
• Others have little or no connection with Armstrongism whatsoever.

That diversity is one reason broad generalizations about Hebrew Roots can be misleading.

There is no single Hebrew Roots creed accepted by everyone who uses the term.

The Larger Historical Picture

The most accurate way to understand the emergence of Hebrew Roots is therefore not as the creation of a new denomination, but as a religious convergence.

Armstrongism contributed an established American tradition of Sabbath and Holy Day observance. The Sacred Name movement contributed its emphasis on Yahweh, Hebrew names and Torah. Messianic Judaism contributed an emphasis on the Jewish context of Jesus and the apostles.

The post-1986 collapse of the Worldwide Church of God created a huge population of people already familiar with many Torah-oriented practices. The Internet then allowed these previously separate communities to discover one another on an unprecedented scale.

Out of this mixture emerged the modern Hebrew Roots movement.

The Real Legacy of Armstrongism

Ironically, one of the most important consequences of Armstrong's ministry may have occurred after his death.

The Worldwide Church of God ultimately moved away from many of the doctrines that had defined Armstrong's ministry.

But the people who had learned those doctrines did not simply disappear. They carried them elsewhere. Some founded new churches. Some joined other organizations. Some became independent teachers. Some entered Messianic Judaism. Some became involved in Sacred Name groups. And some became part of the emerging Hebrew Roots movement.

In that sense, Armstrongism left behind not one successor but an entire religious family tree.

Conclusion: Following the Threads

The history of Hebrew Roots cannot be reduced to a single origin story.

It is neither accurate to say that Herbert W. Armstrong created Hebrew Roots nor accurate to ignore the enormous influence that Armstrongism had on the environment from which Hebrew Roots emerged.

A better historical description is this:

Armstrongism was one of the major streams that flowed into the modern Torah-observant Christian world, but it flowed alongside older Sabbatarian, Sacred Name, and Messianic Jewish streams.

The transformation of the Worldwide Church of God after Armstrong's death dramatically accelerated that process.

Thousands of people suddenly had to decide what they believed apart from the institution that had taught them.

• Some remained Armstrongite.
• Some went elsewhere.
• And some began digging deeper into the Hebrew roots of their faith.

The House of Yahweh in Texas provides a particularly intriguing example because it sits at the intersection of these worlds. Its history demonstrates that the Sacred Name tradition and Armstrongite Sabbatarianism were not isolated phenomena. People moved between them, ideas crossed their boundaries, and the resulting religious landscape became considerably more complicated than any simple denominational family tree can convey.

Perhaps the most useful way to visualize the history is not as a straight line, but as a series of rivers:

Sabbatarianism.

Armstrongism.

Sacred Name religion.

Messianic Judaism.

Torah observance.

Each developed its own course. Eventually, however, some of those streams converged. And from that convergence emerged one of the most distinctive religious movements of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries:

Hebrew Roots.

Silent Pilgrim

Crackpot Prophet's 15 Year Long Bitterness Causes Him To Lash Out Once Again at LCG and PCG - They Are Too Stupid To Know When The Tribulation Starts

In December 2011 Bob Thiel submitted wording changes to Living Church of God’s Statement of Official Beliefs. Charlotte evangelists and ministers allegedly nodded along like they always did whenever Bob opened his mouth, stroking his overinflated ego. By the end of January 2012 the Great Tribulation paragraph was supposed to start at Daniel 11:39 instead of 11:40, because Herbert Armstrong once said something that later got a better translation, and because “Jacob’s trouble” must line up with an attack on the “strongest fortresses” (read: the United States and its British-descended cousins) before the King of the North whirlwinds into the King of the South.

LCG never changed it. As of 2026, their official statement still cites Daniel 11:40–45. Thiel left in late 2012 in a bitter fit of rage and founded the improperly named "Continuing" Church of God, and has spent the subsequent decade and a half reminding the entire universe that they promised him they would change it, but they never did. The grievance has outlived Roderick Meredith. It has outlived multiple world crises that were supposed to be the crisis. It has become its own liturgical calendar: the Feast of Unimplemented Changes.

This is not “love of the truth.” This is a man who treated a parenthetical citation like a marriage vow and then wrote a memoir about the divorce every year.

Armstrongite prophecy is a fear-management system dressed as truth. British-Israelism tells you that America and Britain are Ephraim and Manasseh; therefore, every bad headline is God spanking His favorite grandchildren. The King of the North (a German-led European beast, Holy Roman Empire 2.0) is coming to smash the “strongest fortresses.” The King of the South (an Arab/Muslim coalition south of Jerusalem) will “push,” get overrun, and then the real fireworks start. The TRUE Philadelphians get first-class tickets to Petra and their premium choice of caves. Everyone else is Laodicean and late for the bus and will be either taken as salves to Europe or butchered in the most gruesome manner. After all, Armstrongism requires the butchery to be the most gruesome ever imagined.

Thankfully, new covenant Christianity does not require you to live inside this delusional bubble Thiel has created.

Jesus did not say “blessed are those who correctly sequence Daniel 11:39 versus 11:40 so they can flee on time.” He said the hour is coming when true worshipers worship in spirit and truth, not on this mountain or that one. He said no one knows the day or the hour. He said do not be anxious about tomorrow. The new covenant is “I will remember their sins no more,” not “update your statement of beliefs or you lose the mantle and die in the tribulation.”

You do not have to decode whether “he” in verse 39 is already dividing the land for gain with a strange god before the king of the south pushes in verse 40. You do not have to treat Herbert Armstrong’s WWII-era reading, later adjusted, then re-litigated by a delusional self-appointed prophet, as the hinge of salvation history. The gospel is not a prophecy chart with a “place of safety” checkbox.

Armstrongism turned the Bible into a national-identity decoder ring and then a loyalty test: if your group won’t adopt my sequence, it cannot hold the Philadelphia mantle and therefore cannot finish the work. That is not New Testament Christianity. That is franchise warfare with extra proof-texting.

Daniel 11 is a long, detailed chapter that tracks the post-Alexander world: Ptolemies in the south (Egypt) versus Seleucids in the north (Syria), then later Rome absorbing the northern role. Armstrongism projects the end of the chapter onto the end of the world:

• King of the North = the final European revival of the Holy Roman Empire / Beast system, frequently German-centered, often with a religious figure riding along (Baron Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg). This power supposedly first hits the modern descendants of Israel (US/UK/Canada/Australia/NZ) and later the Middle East.
• King of the South = a coming Islamic or Arab confederacy, classically Egypt-led or a broader caliphate-style bloc “south of Jerusalem.”

The intra-COG fight Thiel is still having is almost comically small: does the Great Tribulation begin when the northern king goes after the Anglo-American “strongest fortresses” (v. 39, Thiel’s hill), or when he later collides with the southern king (v. 40, LCG/PCG wording)? Both camps agree the US and Britain are prophetic Israel, Europe is the bad guy, Muslims are the other bad guy, and their own tiny group is the one that will know when to run. They just disagree on which verse number starts the horror movie.

HWA originally tied some of this to WWII-era events and a KJV rendering of v. 39 that is less clear than later translations. Thiel’s argument is that Armstrong later shifted and that LCG leaders privately agreed in 2008 and 2011. Whether that hallway conversation happened exactly as remembered is now less important than the fact that it is still the main character in 2026 blog posts.

COG history after Armstrong is a demolition derby of “the other guys lost the mantle.” Global became Living after Meredith was ousted. Living produced Continuing after Thiel decided integrity and footnotes had fled Charlotte. Philadelphia Church of God, Restored, United, and dozens of smaller letters-of-the-alphabet groups all claim to be the faithful remnant. Each one has a slightly different chart, a slightly different villain, and a slightly different reason the others are Laodicean.

Thiel additionally claims prophetic status: dreams, a “double portion” anointing that an LCG minister later said he didn’t intend as a prophet ordination AND that NO ONE can verify ever happened as Thiel said it did, and a running list of world events that “align.” Just because “something vaguely Europe or Middle-East-shaped happened this year” is not the same as “thus saith the Lord.” Thiel loves to boast that he doesn’t take a salary and continuously lets us know he writes an astonishing volume of material. Both can be true. Neither requires you to fear missing the exact verse where Jacob’s trouble begins.

The ongoing bitterness is the proof. A person who left over integrity in 2012 and then spent fifteen years cataloging the same unkept promise is not practicing good theology. He is keeping a wound warm. LCG’s refusal to swap 11:40 for 11:39 in a document most members will never parse is treated as proof they cannot lead the final phase of the work. That is an extraordinary amount of spiritual weight to hang on a citation.

New covenant people can say the obvious thing: if your faith requires you to win an argument about the start-verse of the tribulation against a group you left in 2012, you might have mistaken the appendix for the gospel. The new covenant alternative is almost offensively simple: trust Christ, love people, stop treating speculative timelines by deluded self-appointed prophets as a membership exam, and let a 2011 memo stay in 2011. The end of the age will not be delayed because LCG used the wrong verse number in an article. It also will not arrive faster because Thiel is still nursing a massive butthurt.

Here is is the change I explained and then I submitted in writing to the Charlotte-based evangelists in December 2011 on that topic. They agreed to use the following in their Statement of Official Beliefs by the end of January 2012:

THE “GREAT TRIBULATION”

The Bible speaks of a time of great catastrophe, called the “Great Tribulation” (Matthew 24:21-22; Daniel 11:39[xxiv]-45; 12:1; Luke 21:19-36)—also called “Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:3-7). Jesus Christ Himself will have to shorten those horrific days; otherwise “no flesh would be saved” (Matthew 24:22). We believe that we are fast approaching that time.   We also believe that God promises to protect the faithful Philadelphians from this “hour of trial” (Revelation 3:10).[xxv]

Here are the related footnotes that were submitted as partial explanations of the proposed changes:

[xxiv] Since we teach that the Great Tribulation is the time of Jacob’s trouble (Jeremiah 30:7) and Herbert Armstrong taught that it would begin with something like a nuclear attack on the UK and/or USA, we should not start it with Daniel 11:40 which shows the battle between the King of the North and the King of the South. Verse 39 shows the King of the North going against the “strongest fortresses” (NKJV) and dividing the land for gain. And since we teach that the King of the North will go against the British-Israelite nations first, we should not teach that he goes against the King of the South first. All the HQ evangelists specifically agreed to that sequence in a meeting with me in January 2008 and this would be a good time to modify the Statement to reflect this.

[xxv] Elsewhere in the Statement we mention being Philadelphian. By adding this to the Statement we give outsiders (as well as our own members and those with a WCG background) a reason to understand that God plans to show the Philadelphians special favor.

Yet, despite agreeing, LCG still has not made the corrections over 14 years later.

In the sequence of Daniel 11, the Great Tribulation begins in verse 39, not verse 40. Now there appear to be two reasons that LCG and PCG misunderstand the sequence. First is that the late Herbert W. Armstrong originally taught that sequence because of events related to WWII and a mistranslation of verse 39 in the KJV (which was corrected in the NKJV). Although Herbert Armstrong clearly changed his position by 1979, the leaders of LCG and PCG have overlooked/discounted that. The second reason could be based upon a misunderstanding of a translation of Daniel 11:39-40:

39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.

40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. (Daniel 11:39-40, KJV)

The above does not make it clear that the King of the North (the ‘he’ in verse 39) is going against the ‘strongest fortresses like the NKJV and other translations do. Notice a Jewish translation:

39 And he shall deal with the strongest fortresses with the help of a foreign god; whom he shall acknowledge, shall increase glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for a price.

40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him; and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow, as he passes through. (Daniel 11:39-40, Jewish Publication Society, 1917)

Some seem to believe that the ‘time of the end’ does not begin until verse 40, but that is a misunderstanding of how the Hebrew text should be understood. The ‘and’ in verse 40 is not the start of the end, but a continuation of what began in verse 39. This is known by others. For example, the Barnes Notes on the Bible states:

And at the time of the end …. The “time of the end” must properly denote the end or consummation of the series of events under consideration, or the matter in hand, and properly and obviously means here the end or consummation of the transactions which had been referred to in the previous part of the vision. It is equivalent to what we should say by expressing it thus: “at the winding up of the affair.”

The ONLY way to reconcile that the time of Jacob’s trouble (Jeremiah 30:7) starts with the beginning of the Great Tribulation (Matthew 24:21) is to realize that it begins with verse 39 of the sequence in Daniel 11. Those who hold to a start of the Great Tribulation AFTER the King of the North attacks the King of the South will not know until it is too late.

For an English language reader, on the surface verse 40 seems correct as the start of the end, meaning the Great Tribulation there.

Yet, notice the following translation:

40 And in the time of the end the king of the south shall wage war with him: and the king of the north shall rush on like a tempest against him, with chariot and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he came into the lands, and overflowed and passed through. (Daniel 11:40, Smith’s Literal Translation)

The above makes more sense

Armstrongism's Cosmic Real-Estate Scheme: Ronald Weinland’s Latest Sales Pitch for Becoming Gods and Landscaping the Universe

Herbert W. Armstrong’s theology never settled for mere eternal life or a quiet spot in heaven. No, Armstrongism promised something far more extravagant: God is a Family of two (for now), and faithful humans who jump through the right hoops will be “born” as literal spirit gods of the same divine species. These newly minted deities will then inherit the universe itself—ruling it, beautifying it, and busily terraforming barren planets for all eternity. The Promised Land given to ancient Israel? A quaint little prototype for the real prize: galaxies upon galaxies of cosmic development projects.

Ronald Weinland, leader of the minuscule Church of God Preparing for the Kingdom of God, struck out on his own in 1998, later announcing himself a prophet, apostle, and (with his wife) one of the two witless witnesses of Revelation. His prophetic résumé from the Bob Thiel School of Prophecy is a masterclass in missed appointments: the end was supposed to arrive around 2008, then May 2012, then May 2013, then June 2019. In between failed forecasts, a federal jury in 2012 convicted him on five counts of tax evasion for underreporting income, diverting church funds to personal use, and hiding a Swiss bank account. He served 42 months and has been free since roughly 2016. Undeterred, he keeps writing. 

In July 2026, Weinland dropped Chapter 11 of his latest series—“PHASE THREE: GOD’S FAMILY IN AN ERA OF INFINITY”—complete with a companion piece titled “The Inheritance Awaiting God’s Family.” The text is pure Armstrongist greatest hits. The physical universe, we are told, was never an end in itself. Those billions of galaxies and trillions of solar systems have sat largely barren for “billions upon trillions of years” for one very good reason: the spirit beings destined to fill them, build within them, and beautify them had not yet arrived. Earth’s six-day makeover and the garden-tending assignment given to Adam and Eve were only a “very meager beginning.” Once the Family is complete, the real work begins—solar system by solar system, galaxy by galaxy—creating, improving, and enjoying perfect relationships for infinite time. Everlasting life is nice, but the true inheritance is the entire cosmos as a personal renovation project. It sounds majestic until one does the arithmetic.

Roughly 117 billion human beings have ever lived. The observable universe contains something on the order of 10²⁴ to 10²⁵ planets, with potentially habitable ones stretching into the sextillions. Assign every person who has ever drawn breath to a single world, and you still leave the overwhelming majority of the cosmos empty and unused. Armstrongism’s ready answer is that spirit-composed gods will simply create more life over infinite time and keep expanding outward. How convenient. The universe, it seems, has been politely waiting 13.8 billion years for a relative handful of overcomers to show up with their divine hard hats and landscaping tools. One can almost hear the galaxies muttering, “Finally—someone who knows how to dress and keep a solar system.” 

Then there is the family-logistics problem. If these newly deified humans are to populate planets with their descendants or relatives, where exactly does one draw the line? How many generations back must be included before the entire human race collapses into one gigantic, hopelessly interrelated clan that somehow has to fit on a single rock? At some point the celestial personnel office will have to announce, “Sorry, third cousins twice removed, you’re shipping out to that frozen moon on the edge of the Andromeda galaxy—have fun with the in-laws.” The doctrine’s solution is that earthly kinship dissolves once everyone becomes part of the one God Family. Biological family trees are transcended. Problem solved—by declaration. Scripture, of course, never bothers to describe this administrative miracle, any more than it describes resurrected saints personally seeding life on exoplanets.

These are not nitpicking details. They expose the teaching for what it is: an imaginative speculative fantasy draped over a few biblical phrases about sonship, inheritance, and creation’s longing. Armstrong took legitimate themes and inflated them into a detailed future of cosmic public works for which there is neither textual blueprint nor coherent logistics. Weinland’s latest installment adds nothing new; it simply repackages the old dream in the language of “phases” and “infinity,” delivered by a man whose track record on predicting the future is roughly as reliable as a weather forecast issued by a broken barometer.

The appeal is obvious. Who wouldn’t want to believe that ordinary human life is merely the apprenticeship for eternal godhood and endless creative projects free of selfishness, war, and human drama? The narrative flatters. It also collapses under the weight of scale, kinship, and the stubborn refusal of the Bible to endorse planet-by-planet real-estate development as the destiny of the saints. The universe is vast, ancient, and mostly empty. The claim that it has been holding its breath for a finite number of Church of God graduates to arrive and start the remodeling remains one of the more charmingly absurd promises in the crowded marketplace of religious grandiosity. Weinland and Armstrongism keep selling it. Buyers would be wise to inspect the fine print—and the arithmetic—before signing.