Herbert W Armstrong and the Radio Church of God

Herbert W Armstrong and the Radio Church of God in the Light of the Bible

By Walter Martin

Bethany Fellowship Inc. Publishers

Minneapolis, MN

1968 1972 printing

 

 1965/1968 Cover with same contents as above cover

 excerpts...

Pg 1

The Radio Church of God (the official name of Herbert Armstrong’s cult) could more properly be designated “The New Galationism” because of its emphasis upon legalism.  Since this group is gaining momentum throughout the entire world, it is essential; that its theological system be analyzed in the light of the Word of God, to see whether or not it is, as advertised, “The Plain Truth.”

Pg 4

The Eclecticism of Herbert Armstrong

Armstrong’s biographer, Roderick Meredith, goes to great pains to point out that “there was never any association in any way with Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists, Mormons, or any such sects as some accusers have falsely claimed.”

1. Seventh-day Adventism and Herbert Armstrong

Unfortunately for Mr. Meredith, the Seventh-day Adventist denomination has done a complete historical résumé of Herbert W. Armstrong and his association with them.  Writing for the Ministerial Association and his church George Burnside states concerning Mr. Armstrong:

“…Mr. Armstrong is an off-shoot of an off-shoot of an off-shoot of the Seventh-day Adventist church.”

In 1866 Elders B.F. Snook and W. H. Brinkerhoff, two ministers of the small and newly organized Iowa Conference of Seventh-day Adventists apostatized, and with a few members formed a group of their own.  They directed their work from Marion, Iowa.  In 1889 they centered their work in Stanbury, Missouri calling their company “Church of God (Adventist).”

Mr. Armstrong joined this small church and after a stormy experience with them, he reported that Mr. Dugger, in a dispute over leadership, led off a sizable part of the membership and called their group “the Church of God (Seventh-day).”  Mr. Armstrong joined this off-shoot movement.  Sometime later because of Mr.  Armstrong’s acceptance of the British Israelism theory and other subjects, he went out on his own and formed his own church calling it “The radio Church of God.”

Having checked the Adventists’ documentation on this thoroughly, and finding it to be accurate, what Mr. Meredith glosses over lightly now takes on significance. The neighbor lady who revealed the great discovery to Mrs. Armstrong about the law of God was a former member of the Seventh-day Adventist church and a member of the splinter group. Mr. Armstrong’s theology is many areas paralleled Seventh-day Adventism, such as, his insistence upon observance of the Seventh-day Sabbath, abstinence from certain articles of food as unclean, a general Adventist system of prophetic interpretation (albeit with his own peculiar modifications), his extreme legalism and the observance of feasts, and new moons, and his denunciation of the doctrines of hell and eternal punishment for which he has substituted the Adventist doctrine of annihilation of the wicked.  Mr. Armstrong owes (pg5) considerable debt to Seventh-day Adventism as he does Jehovah’s Witnesses (with whom he agrees in his denial of the doctrines of the Trinity and the bodily resurrection of Christ) and the Mormon Church, whose teaching that man may become as God was appropriated by Armstrong without even the slightest acknowledgment to Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

Mr. Meredith seems overly eager to pass on these facts, but facts they are. His blanket dismissal “there was never any association in any way with Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventism and Mormons” is a clear misrepresentation of historical fact.

Pg 6

To sum up the theories of the Anglo Israel cult in a concise manner is not difficult. and to refute them from the Scriptures as noted scholars and Biblical expositors have done many times, is essentially an elementary task.  But with the advent of Herbert Armstrong’s version of the old error, and his utilization of it as cloak for his own confusion on Biblical theology, the problem is no longer elementary, in fact, it is quite complex and deserves the careful consideration of responsible Christian ministers and laymen. For it is certain that they will be affected, sooner or later, by the plausible propaganda which flows from the Armstrong presses and out on the airwaves.

Pg 14

Like so many other non-Christian cultists, Herbert Armstrong claims for himself a divine mandate and nowhere is this more clearly exemplified than in his own writing: (excerpt from The Inside Story of the World Tomorrow Broadcast)

Mr. Armstrong’s son, Garner Ted, heir apparent to the 19-cycle throne, carries the same through:

Pg 15

As did Joseph Smith, “Pastor” Russell, and Mary Baker Eddy, before him, so does Mr. Armstrong pose his efforts as the only work which is accurately representing Christianity today.  But a tree is known by its fruit, and fruits are not only manifested in a life which is lived, but also in doctrines which are believed and taught.  And so it is to the doctrines and teachings of the Radio Church of God that we shall now turn for a closer look at what Mr. Armstrong calls The Plan Truth.

Pg 23

The similarity to Mormonism in Armstrong's theology at this point is quite striking, for as previously observed in our chapter on the Mormons, they, too, believe and teach that men may become members of the God-family and become gods.  Armstrong, on the other hand, exceeds even the Mormon fantasy boldly teaching what appears to be a pantheistic unity of God in which all members of the ‘family’ participate.  This is certainly a view which is not shared by any of the inspired writings of the Scripture, and his recourse to the Hebrew plural (Elohim) in which he stretched beyond all proportion and contextual meaning to the forced interpretation of a ‘family” or “kingdom,” is indirectly a pathetic admission of the extremely limited knowledge he posses of the language.

Armstrong’s usage of Elohim is not consistent with any scholarly presentation, in fact, as he uses it, it is simply a perversion tailored to impress those who can be impressed with the ludicrous.

The followers of Armstrong’s cult should consult the third chapter of Genesis where they will find that Satan first taught the “God family” doctrine to Adam and Eve.  Both Armstrong and the Mormons have received and believed the same perversion which ushered in the reign of sin and death upon the human race, for if Satan lied when he said “you shall be as gods” so does Mr. Armstrong “wrest the Scripture to his own destruction” and sadly to the destruction, spiritually speaking, of those who follow in his training.

The plain truth of this whole matter is that we do indeed grasp what Mr. Armstrong is teaching. His radio Church of God serves only as a camouflage for his doctrinal deviations which are mixed with orthodox terminology and evangelical clichés and infused with numerous half-truths.  This concoction is enunciated with a dogmatism and arrogance akin to that of the late Judge Rutherford of Jehovah Witnesses. And were it nor for Armstrong’s dynamic presentation and wide radio coverage coupled with the spiritual vacuum which  (pg 24) today pervades many quarters of Christendom his entire system of interpretation would be the object of humor instead of the serious consideration it now demands.

The Interpretive Methods Employed

More from Ambassadors of Armstrongism:

Extreme Literalism

If a word itself is to mean anything, it must e defined in its normal use.  This is certainly a recognized principle of Biblical Interpretation. Words must be interpreted literally or one loses the valid base of interpretation.  This is not to say that a word might be taken figuratively if the context demanded it.

In Armstrongism, however, literal interpretation is sometimes taken to an illegitimate extreme in order to prove a point.  For example, it identifies the Christmas tree in Jeremiah 10: 2-6, and then uses this portion to prove that Christmas trees are condemned by God.

There is a perfect description of the Christmas tree, termed by the Eternal as "the way of the heathen -   the  custom of the people.'  We are commanded not to learn the way or follow it.

However, even a cursory reading of these verses reveals the subject to be idolatry of Israel and not Christmas trees.


"Knight-jump' Exegesis

In his excellent book The Four Major Cults, Anthony Hoekema the expression "knight-jump" exegesis to describe an interpretive method of the Jehovah's Witnesses.  It is also an apt description of Armstrongism.  In chess, the "knight' can jump over other pieces and move a total of three squares forward and to the side, landing on a square of a different color from that on which it started.  Armstrongism will sometimes jump from one part of hte Bible to another, bypassing contexts, in order to establish some teaching.  In his pamphlet on Armstrongism, Paul Wilson records an example of this method ion action.  In Matthew 19, Jesus told the rich young ruler  that he must sell all that he had if he were to really keep the commandments.  The young man was sadden by these words and Jesus then commented on riches.

Mr. Armstrong goes on in Mathew 19 to the 25th and 26th verses, and makes a false use of them.  H e connects the 127th verse to the 25th, as though the disciples said, "Who then can be saved?" when they heard Him refer the young inquirer to the ten commandments. The fact is, however, that in the intervening verses the Lord took up the case of riches as being a hindrance to man's entering the kingdom of God.  This was what amazed them, and not, as Mr. Armstrong says, How then can a man be saved if it is a matter of keeping the commandments?  That is not the subject, so Mr. Armstrong's use (vs 26) is in error.  It is a twist to make keeping the law for eternal life seem easy, with God's help.

One of the classic examples of the "knight-jump" exegesis in Armstrongism is to be found in the explanation of how the ten "lost" tribes got to England from Canaan.  Ephraim (Israel) was taken captive to Assyria.  Armstrongism then turns to Hosea 12:1 which states that "Ephraim followeth after the east wind."  Since an East wind travels west, therefore, it is reasoned that Ephraim went west from Assyria. Psalm 89:25, speaking of David's throne says, "I will set his hand in the sea."  The throne had to be planted west of Assyria in the sea.  Jeremiah 3:11, 12 records Jeremiah's commission to Israel: "Go and proclaim these words tot he north."  So the location of Ephraim is then stated to be towards the north, also west, an in the sea.  Isaiah 49:2 says Israel will come from the north and from the west, which means "northwest."  Isaiah 49:1 is said to teach that Israel is in the "isles."  Jeremiah 31:9, 10 is said to refer to Ephraim and Manasseh: "Hear the word of the Lord, O ye nations and declare it in the isles afar off."  Therefore, Israel went afar off the northwest and dwelt in the isles (coastlines) of the sea.  This is the biblical evidence presented by Armstrongism to support its position.  A refutation is not in order here. The jumping from text to text with complete disregard for context is amazing to behold. The combining of totally unrelated passages is characteristic of "knight-jumping."


Neglect of Biblical Differences

This particular factor is more  than an error of omission rather than one of commission.  In the process of interpreting, the Worldwide Church of God evidences little knowledge of the fact that God has dealt with men differently in the history of mankind.  For example, a command given to Moses and Israel would not automatically qualify as a requirement imposed on the saints in the church of Ephesus.  The failure to discern some of these differences has its resulting confusion.  The Old Testament Prophets, especially Ezekiel, are seen directing their messages only to the church today. The messages of these prophets had almost no importance tot he people of their own day.  Any valid system of biblical interpretation acknowledges the historical situation of a particular message, though there are differences in an understanding of the full significance of many of these messages.  It is, of course, the British -Israelite theory which leads Armstrongism to blur these biblical distinctions.  The neglect of such distinctions enables the Worldwide Chruchof God to wrongly appropriate and apply old Testament truths in New Testament settings.

Misuse of "Double Fulfillment"

Throughout the literature of the Worldwide Church of  God, one reads about the "duality' and "dual fulfillment."  It is stated that throughout the Scriptures "there is usually a former, typical, and then antitypical fulfilment of many prophecies."  This concept has given Armstrongismexegete find a second fulfillment relating to the Untied States and Britain.

It is this kind of abuse that has caused some to shy away from the concept of double fulfillment as a hermeneutical principle.  However, it does have a legitimate place in biblical interpretation, because of the principle which is not nearly as flexible as one might think.  This principle is clarified by this statement.

The concept of double reference is not the Pandora's Box of Biblical Hermeneutics as some opponents would claim.  It is the failure of many to distinguish application from interpretation that has caused such an accusation to be leveled at the principle. To accept the law of double reference as a legitimate tool for interpretation of prophecy is not to open the door to all kinds of fanciful notions as to the hidden and allegorical meanings that might be alluded to in a prophetic passage.
To speak of the law of double reference is to speak of interpretation, not application.  Double reference is to one interpretation and manifold applications. It is one message for two audiences separated in time.

Armstrongism consistently fails to make this distinction and does much of the application, thus abusing a legitimate principle.

Allegorizing

When pressed by a potentially damaging passage of Scripture,the Worldwide Church of God has been known to leave its literal interpretation, which it loudly proclaims, and resort to allegorizing. For example, in the Book of Revelation (6:9-11), he Tribulation martyrs cry out to the Lord to avenge their blood. Now such consciousness after death does not fit into Armstrong theology, so it is said that these martyrs (who died previously) "allegorically are asking how long before the second coming of Christ and the end of the age."  One wonders how a person can allegorically   cry out.

This same approach to the Scriptures was observed as well in the previous discussion of Lazarus and hte rich man. "Abraham's bosom" was taken allegorically, without any justification, to represent Canaan in the millennium.

All evangelicals with a loyalty to the Scriptures realize that the Bible does employ figurative language.  Symbolic expressions are sued throughout, but the evangelical, whether amillennialist or dispensationalist, strenuously objects when theological bias is allowed to move interpretation into the realm of the absurd.  In the example of Lazarus and the rich man, only one with preconceived notions would see an earthly kingdom in these words of the Lord.  This is clearly an abuse of the symbolism and figurative language of Scripture.

after analyzing the interpretations of Armstrongism, one wonders how it can claim to simply be taking the Bible at face value and teaching "plain Bible truth."  The wrenching and twisting of Scripture goes on page after page in its writings, defying the hermeneutical principles built on grammatical, contextual and historical considerations.

It is the conclusion of non-Armstrongites that Herbert W Armstrong is the interpreter for the Worldwide Church of God.  After a person has read Armstrongite literature for a while, he notices a most interesting phenomenon. Unless the reader checks the author of the article he cannot guess who is writing, since all the staff writers sound alike. They ave the same basic writing style and they arrive at the same conclusions based on the same argumentations. There is obviously just one mind behind the interpretations.

Ambassadors of Armstrongism

Ambassadors of Armstrongism 

was originally published in 1975 by Paul N Benware (Purple cover) and again in 1984 and 1988 (Black cover).

1975 edition published by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, New Jersey

1988 edition published by Christian Literature Crusade, Pennsylvania

Paul Benware

Paul Benware Faculty Citation Awards

Excerpts from Introduction

The Growth and Influence of the Worldwide Church of God

The Worldwide Church of God began in 1934 as a very small and insignificant work, but since then it has mushroomed in size, power , wealth and outreach, until now millions weekly are being influenced by  it's message.  This rapid growth can be attributed to several factors.  First, its presses turn out a tremendous volume of attractive, yet free books and pamphlets.  The monthly Plain Truth magazine has a circulation of over three million.  Second, the growth of this group is stimulated by three colleges, which have first-class facilities.  And third, this cult has reached millions through the effective use of both radio and television.

As this cult has been growing in size, it has been multiplying its influence.  any person or cult which claims the Bible as the highest authority, as does Armstrongism, will make inroads into the true Church of Jesus Christ.  Most cults thrive on those they convert out of Christian churches, whether they be liberal or conservative in theology.  The immature and carnal are most easily drawn away by the new and devious "winds of doctrine" (Eph. 4:14.  However, even believers who have some knowledge of the truth can be affected, since it is not simply ideas of men that are being propagated, but rather perversions of doctrine that finds its source in the Wicked One and his followers (I Tim 4:1)

Armstrongism follows the course of every other cult.  It too claims loyalty to God and His Word with the result that it takes both people and money away from the valid work of God.  It also brings confusion into the church as it mixes some truth with great portions of error.

This rapid growth and influence of the Worldwide Church of God makes imperative a detailed study of it.  With the increasing number of cults, splinter groups and religious organizations,it is impossible for any individual to carefully research all these various groups and still carry on his regular occupation.  Since very little study has been devoted to this rapidly growing cult, this book hopefully will help meet a need in the realm of apologetics.  To effectively combat error, the error itself must be known and understood.

The Purpose of the Study

The general aim of this study is to analyze and present the system of teachings known as the Worldwide Church of God, or better known by the name of its founder, Herbert W Armstrong.

The first and primary purpose of this study will be to give a systematic presentation of the doctrines of Armstrongism.  The emphasis will naturally fall upon the major areas of doctrinal deviation, rather than on areas where a position is taken close to the orthodox one.

The second aim of this book will be to present the orthodox, biblical position on those major areas of erroneous teachings found in Armstrongism.  It is not enough to simply declare its views heretical, but it is also necessary to present the scriptural position based on solid exegesis and sound hermeneutics.

This study will briefly analyze the hermeneutics of this movement, as a third purpose.  It will attempt to discover what guidelines were used in arriving at its interpretations.

Fourth, another goal is to is to look at the origins of this group in order to see what religious thought and groups influenced the theology of the Worldwide Church of God.  All cults claim to have come into existence directly at an impulse from God, either through revelation or illumination.  It will, therefore, be one purpose to discover how this cult and its teachings came into existence.

It is not our purpose to attack individual personalities or damage the character of any.  Since this movement is so closely tied to its leading personalities, it will be necessary to make reference to them, but the intention is that of analyzing doctrines not personalities.

The Influence of Seventh-day Adventism

It is noted previously that Herbert Armstrong was affiliated for several years  with the Church of God (Seventh-day), which is an offshoot of Seventh-day Adventism.  The influence of Adventism is readily apparent by comparing quotations from Armstrong's writings and those of Adventist writers, and Mr. Armstrong himself admits studying much of their literature.

(below is a list of SDA teachings that HWA borrowed.  In the book the heading below is followed by HWA teaching on the subject))

     Sabbath keeping is a command and a sign today...

     Sabbath keeping is necessary for salvation...

     Sunday observance is the 'mark of the beast'...

     Keeping the Ten Commandments is necessary for salvation...

     A distinction is made between moral and ceremonial laws...

     Man does not possess a soul...

     Man is mortal and temporal only...

     Immortality for man is continual...

     Death brings cessation of being and "sleep' to man...

     Christ could have seined as a man...

     The new birth is connected with the resurrection and is a process...

The Influence of the Jehovah's Witnesses

Though Herbert Armstrong never affiliated with the Jehovah's Witnesses, he did become familiar with the literature. He claims, however,that he had come to the truth before finding out that they agreed on points with him. The similarity of teachings and argumentation between the two challenges the credibility of this assertion, since Charles Taze Russell lived and wrote long before the theology of the Worldwide Church of God was formulated.

     The 'trinity' is a pagan concept...

     The Holy Spirit is a force, not a person...

     Jesus Christ rose in a spiritual, not material body...

     The wicker will be annihilated...

     An opportunity for salvation after death...

The Influence of Mormonism

No mention is made by Mr. Armstrong of his familiarity with the Mormon literature.  However, some teachings are strikingly similar.

     Deity is the ultimate goal for man...

     The Fall was a good thing and was planned by God...

      The true church has been lost since he days of the apostles...

     The name "Elohim" shows plurality of God's...

The Influence of British-Israelism

The theory of British-Israelism  (or Anglo-Israelism) flourished  the 1800's, decades before the 'concersion' of Herbert W Armstrong and the beginning of his movement.  The alleged new truth of the Worldwide Church of God parallels in detail the old British-Israelite theory.  A few selected quotes will be sufficient to demonstrate this point.

     The word "Jew" always means one from Judah...

     Jews and Israelites are to be distinguished...

     The 'birthright concept' has been hidden truth for centuries...

     Jeremiah's call was to Israel in captivity in the British Isles as well as to Judah in the land...

     Jeremiah had a double commission given by God...

Many other parallels can easily be seen between Mr. Armstrong's book The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy and J.H. Allen's work, Judah's Scepter and Joseph's Birthright.

Dave Pack and the Goosebump Supercut

 

The Goosebumps Supercut is a humorous assembly of one of the manipulative techniques that David C. Pack uses on members of The Restored Church of God. The smirks and chuckling mask a darker indoctrination practice: manipulation through repetitive phrasing.

The seemingly colorful and light-hearted words signal to the members that what they are hearing from their Pastor General is so shocking, important, and precious that every member should experience a physical reaction of awe to the unique revealed knowledge.

This subconsciously reinforces David C. Pack’s legitimacy as God’s end-times vessel for delivering critical prophetic and biblical understanding. When he preaches a never-before-understood “present truth” to his very select group, because it is presented by an apostle fully empowered with God’s authority, it is to be received with due reverence to the point their skin should tighten.

After 141 failed prophetic dates for the arrival of the Kingdom of God, only those who blindly accept David C. Pack’s authority will get goosebumps from anything he says.

exrcg.org

LCG Members: Do not even think of questioning us!

First, matzos were too sinful; now your thoughts are too independent: LCG brethren, when will you finally get it right? (Answer: Never, Apparently)

Oh joy—another soul-enriching Sabbath greeting from Dr. Douglas S. Winnail, straight from the Charlotte Department of Approved Opinions. Because what better way to prepare your heart for rest and worship than a fresh reminder that even your brain belongs to headquarters?

Christ’s Mind or Our Opinions?

How many times have you foolishly uttered the heretical phrases: “Here is how I see it,” “Here is what I think,” or—brace yourselves—the nuclear option: “Here is how I think it should be done”? These treasonous words are, of course, most often hurled at the sacred leadership—even (gasp) in the Church!

Moses faced the same tragic problem: men who dared to hold “different opinions” (Numbers 16:1–33). Peter, of all people, actually rebuked Jesus Himself (Matthew 16:21–23). In both landmark cases of spiritual crime, the culprits failed to identify the true source of their wicked, divisive thoughts. (Spoiler: it wasn’t humble prayer or careful Bible study. It was obviously demonic pride masquerading as discernment.)

Before you so much as whisper one of your dangerous “different” opinions, pause and tremble at God’s thunderous declaration: “My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways” (Isaiah 55:8). And lest you forget, Solomon—the wisest man who ever lived—warned: “A fool vents all his feelings, but a wise man holds them back” (Proverbs 29:11). Modern translation from Charlotte HQ: Real Christians don’t have feelings. Real Christians don’t have thoughts. Real Christians have headquarters-approved scripts. Anything else is rebellion, plain and simple.We must therefore develop “the mind of Christ” (Philippians 2:5)—which, miraculously, seems to match Dr. Winnail’s weekly memos word-for-word. What a coincidence!

Have a profitable Sabbath,

Douglas S. Winnail

(Profitable defined as: silent, compliant, non-questioning, and ideally slightly guilt-ridden.)

Let’s recap the LCG spiritual growth plan so far: 

• Phase 1: Make your unleavened bread too fluffy? You’re innovating sin right into the Passover symbols. 
• Phase 2: Dare to privately wonder if a minister’s decision makes biblical sense? Congratulations—you’re now Korah 2.0 with a side of Peter-level audacity.

At this pace, next week’s update will warn against dreaming without first submitting the dream’s interpretation to ministerial review. Because nothing says “Christ’s mind” like running every neuron through Charlotte for doctrinal clearance.

So brethren, keep those lips zipped, those questions buried, and those independent thoughts safely suppressed. Unity isn’t achieved through love, truth, or the Holy Spirit—it’s achieved through perpetual fear of being labeled “divisive.”

After all, in the one true Church, the highest form of spirituality isn’t obedience to Christ… it’s obedience to the men who tell you what Christ really meant.

Sleep tight. Dream only approved dreams.

Your local Laodicean inquirer

Christ’s Mind or Our Opinions? How many times have you said or heard, “Here is how I see it,” or “Here is what I think,” or “Here is how I think it should be done?” All too often these comments are directed at people in leadership positions—even in the Church. Moses was criticized by men who held different opinions (Numbers 16:1–33). Peter differed with Jesus over a matter and even rebuked Christ (Matthew 16:21–23). In both cases, the people expressing critical opinions did not recognize the real source of their negative and divisive thoughts and actions. Before we start sharing our “different” opinions, we need to remember God’s warning, “My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways” (Isaiah 55:8). We also need to remember Solomon’s warning, “A fool vents all his feelings, but a wise man holds them back” (Proverbs 29:11). As true Christians, we need to develop a godly perspective that reflects the mind of Jesus Christ (Philippians 2:5).
Have a profitable Sabbath,
Douglas S. Winnail