Adult Sabbath School" Does "Jesus is Coming Soon" Do More Harm Than Good?

Is it healthy or even wise for the focus of any church to be the Second Coming of Jesus?  After 2000 years the concept of "soon", "shortly" and "quickly" have long since faded in reality.  The First Century Apostles were clearly mistaken about Jesus returning soon, although that is the constant theme of all of the New Testament Gospels, Epistles and Letters.  

The Apostle Paul made the point to the Church back in his times that "we shall not all die, but we shall all be changed" (I Cor. 15:51).  Of course he was mistaken and he died as well just as all others who just knew Jesus would return for them died over the past two millenia. Lives back then were put on hold in anticipation of the soon coming event. The Church, for a short time as it was intended to be, held all things in common because "time was short."  That practice was never intended as a long term approach to church practice. It faded when two things happened.  Jesus did not return and more wealthy educated Greeks came into the church and weren't about to give their wealth to the church in such a practice. 

It is and was not just the Worldwide Church of God that heavily emphasised the soon and imminent coming of Jesus. The Adventists, for decades, have made prophecy of Jesus coming again a focal point in their evangelizing.  The Book of Revelation, as still today in the splits and splinters, is THE go to proof that we are in the end times still and again.  It, however, never really seems to be true and one generation after the next has been left disappointed if not dis-illusioned over the issue.

So obvious was the non-return of Jesus and the coming of an earthly Kingdom of God to overcome

all human governments that Church doctrine began to evolve to reflect this reality.  In time, Christians were going to simply die and go to Heaven.  (Or Hell) and it didn't matter if Jesus came literally to earth or not anymore.  Some teach that humans hang out ever dead in the grave until the Second coming and then it all works out just fine for most. As a kid I always wondered just how the sea could give up it's dead when there is nothing left to give up no doubt. I supposed their spirits just hung out on the bottom awaiting their time to return.  

So I ask..

Is it wise, seeing that Jesus has not returned soon, quickly or really shown anyone the things which must shortly come to pass, now 2000 years ago, to keep holding it out as the carrot on the stick to get people interested in church?   The night was not really far spent as noted in the New Testament nor "the hour now is" that wasn't.   

I know we're all very familiar with...

"Verily I say unto you", This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" (Matthew 24:34).

We simply have to admit, at face value, Jesus was wrong and not only DID that generation pass away, but so have countless others that followed. Jesus has not been misunderstood in this statement. He was wrong. Sincere not doubt and it simply will not go into the bible-reader mind that this might be the simple truth of the matter. There has to be another explanation that makes Jesus right in this perspective not 2000 years past.

And there is! We have read it wrong. Jesus did not mean what he said and we can relax. Jesus wasn't talking to those people at that juncture in history.

"This generation" was not the one Jesus was talking TO, but rather the generation that "these things" would begin to happen IN. Whew! It's in the far future and means a future society when all these signs accelerate and come to a crashing finale ending with the Second Coming.

We now have wiggle room to account for the fact that Jesus has not returned yet. Jesus wasn't mistaken about his own times, he was referring to another time.

Gleason Archer, who offers this solutions to the "Jesus didn't mean it would be in his time," notes accurately what we all know 2000 years later.

"Obviously these apocalyptic scenes and earth-shaking events did not take place within the generation of those who heard Christ's Olivet discourse. Therefore Jesus could not have been referring to his immediate audience when He made this prediction..." (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, pg 338).

Archer has to say this as he cannot possibly entertain the idea that Jesus was himself wrong in his perceptions of the times in which he lived and his role in those times. Later in the Gospels, authors would lower the expectations of the early Church, who thought Jesus meant them by reminding them late in the game when it was obvious Jesus wasn't coming any time soon that "a day with the Lord is as a thousand years. Sorry, we forgot to tell you that in the beginning." As long as one is incapable of thinking Jesus was himself wrong the Kingdom of God being just around the corner if he did his part, the doctrine of disappointments would have to be addressed as time went on.

And so we simply need to ask a very simple question. To whom was Jesus speaking? From the opening NT texts, it is obvious that the disciples, apostles and members of the church thought it meant THEM and did not get any hint of Jesus meaning anything other than THEM in THEIR time, which was short. The idea that Jesus would "build my Church" came decades after Jesus death when most were dead or dying of old age and yet the end did not come. Jesus never envisioned a Church that would follow decades and millennia after his death. Jesus life would always be lived and lost in the context of Judaism and the Synagogue.

But back to the original question. To whom was Jesus speaking when he said the words and to whom did he mean for it to apply? The answer is within the context, plain and simple.

"Take heed that no man deceive you." (Matt 24:4)
"...ye shall hear of wars, and rumors of wars..." (Matt 24:6)
"Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted..." (Matt 24:9)
"When ye therefore shall see the the abomination of desolation..." (Matt 24:15)
"But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter..." (Matt 24:20)
"Behold, I have told you before." (Matt 24:25)

The context in which Jesus spoke was his own. The "you" that he was addressing was the group he was addressing then and the group to which all these things would happen for, and soon. Jesus was telling those disciples that these things would happen in their time. Jesus made a mistake in his perceptions.

In our time, Christians read the same words and see the "ye" and "you" as "me" and "us" just as the original disciples would have. The only difference is that the disciples actually were disappointed and this generation has yet to realize their own disappointment to come.

The proof that Jesus himself meant the people he was talking to is found in the fact that the "this generation" comment is actually the tale end of a much larger, often overlooked quote taken in it's entirety.

"So likewise YE when YE shall SEE ALL these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto YOU, THIS generation shall not pass, till ALL these things be fulfilled." (Matt 24:33-24 emphasis mine)

There is no reason to twist the words of Jesus to mean more than they were ever intended to mean. A scripture can never mean what it never meant. The early disciples and infant Church, knew it meant them and we see the gradual deterioration of their personal confidence in the immediacy of the Second Coming promise throughout the NT.

I Thessalonians 4:15-17 "...For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout...Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air..." Meaning...some would die, but not us who tell you this. Jesus still means us.

I Corinthians 15:51,52 "...We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump..." Meaning...you will die, but we won't but it all works out...Jesus still meant us.

Romans 13:11-12 "And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand..." Meaning...we had some doubts, but now we know it's almost here. Jesus still meant us.

James 5:8 "Be ye also patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh." Meaning...impatience was growing, hang in there. Jesus still meant us.

I John 2:18 "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time." Meaning...Jesus still meant us.

I Peter 4:7 "But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer."

Revelation 22:20 "He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly...." Meaning...ok, it's been about 60 years, but Jesus still means us.

Obviously, everyone of these quoted hopes and statements were wrong. Jesus did not return for them and to date has not returned for anyone. Paul and the early church who wrote in his name was just as wrong as the many COG prophetic types are wrong in this time. And it is based on the fact that Jesus himself was wrong which I know most Christians can never come to admit.

https://ezinearticles.com/?The-Second-Coming-The-Eternal-Carrot&id=94672

So again I ask, Is it wise of the Splits and Splinters or any Church for that matter to promote the "soon" and "quickly" of Jesus imminent return with now 2000 years of proof that it simply was not so for those to whom the promises were actually made? Is this not obviously something that is simply not true.  Does it not promote more skepticism than hope and doubt than encouragement?   Are fear, guilt and shame along with the "Jesus is coming soon" the only motivators for the faith?

Kieren Underwood: The Exclamation Mark Church of God!

The Exclamation Mark Church of God!

Kieren Underwood

Multiple exclamation marks," he went on, shaking his head, "are a sure sign of a diseased mind." - Terry Pratchett

"Keep your exclamation points under control. You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose." - Elmore Leonard

For a man claiming to be inspired by God, Gerald Flurry's books sure are boring as hell. To paraphrase a quote I can't quite remember exactly, "God tells us he called the weak and base, but do they have to be banal as well?" 

As a child growing up in the PCG, I always had a feeling Flurry was a bad writer. I loved reading. But not his books. I don't agree with other Christian writers like C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton, but at least they're interesting.

The years I spent at Herbert W. Armstrong College were probably the tipping point. I'd be sitting in my study chair, 6:00am and still groggy, trying to fit in the compulsory hour of Bible study (also known as: "Flurry's New Booklet" study). Then, bam--"This world will go through the most horrible suffering it has ever known!!"--smack--"The Laodiceans are going to have to face God's wrath!"--boom--"Joseph Tkatch Jr. is literally Satan!"--crack--"I am the new Elisha, bitches!!" Wait... I thought this book was about Daniel?

Not only would you have to sit through book-long rants against people you'd never met and the ever-immanent threat of The Worst Suffering Ever, you'd have to see it repeated in italics, all-caps, and then the most formidable format of all: the double size all-caps italics with multiple exclamation points. 

So I got to thinking the other day: just how many exclamation marks does Flurry really use?

Elmore Leonard, an author whose credibility comes from the fact that people read his books without the threat of the Lake of Fire, tells us to use no more than "two or three per 100,000 words of prose." Since most of Flurry's books are less than 50,000 words, we should be looking at one or two exclamation marks per book. 

I went straight to the first eBook on theTrumpet.com--January 16: God's Miracle Day. A quick search revealed 130 exclamation marks. Oops. At a mere 9072 words, this works out, according to Leonard, as an exclamation mark ratio roughly 716 times too large.  It also makes for an "exclamation mark to sentence" ratio of 0.23--every fourth sentence has one. 

I couldn't help myself, so I did the other books as well. Here are the results:

double click to enlarge

Flurry tops out near a 0.25 "exclamation mark to sentence" ratio. Take out chapter headings and external quotations I'm pretty sure Flurry could hit the 1-in-3 ratio, and then you could be in for a real nice reading rhythm. Calm-Calm-Shout! Calm-Calm-Shout! Just as you're about to fall asleep, you'd be hit with another exclamation mark wake-up call! No sleep for you! 

Some of the books which hit the high end of the ratio aren't ones you'd expect. John's Gospel--The Love of God tops the list with 24.7 percent of sentences ending with exclamation marks. God loves you--but he's really angry about it. The Epistle of James is second, with 23.7 percent, and taking third spot is The New Throne of David, which, of course, was unofficially ghost-written by Joel Hilliker. I wonder if he had to go through and add in extra exclamation marks just to give it an authentic Flurry vibe. 

I also wondered whether Flurry has been getting angrier over the years. So I sorted the books by publication date.

double click to enlarge

With the exception of Jordan and God's Church in Prophecy, Flurry seems to have become slightly angrier. From 1992-2000, Flurry sat at a 13.2 percent exclamation mark rate. Then, from 2001-2019, he took off, averaging 19.0 percent exclamation mark usage. 

On a final note, Brian Davis's The Administration of the Spirit, and Wayne Turgeon's The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse have exclamation mark rates of 10.0 percent and 12.3 percent, respectively. Armstrong started the tradition, and PCG ministers are continuing it. There you have it--real, definitive proof of Apostolic Succession. Except it's not inspiration, it's just tone of voice.

Backslidding LCG Members Skipping Services

Why is it that the boys in Charlotte cannot ever compliment the members of the Living Church of God and say anything encouraging?  They are always getting beat over the head for some offense.  They can never do anything right.  Ultimately though, it is not about people skipping services, but the fact that LCG's income takes a hit.

From Church of God News:

Gerald Weston writes in LCG’s latest update (Sept.19):

“… we notice that when a Holy Day falls between Monday and Friday, our attendances are lower than when a Holy Day falls on the weekend. Everyone should be prepared to take time off from work or school, as this is an annual Sabbath, a Holy Convocation (a commanded assembly – Leviticus 23:4, 23–25). The difference in attendance is not great, but it is noticeable.”

Members are expected to make an offering on every annual holy day in addition to tithing. Not everyone can afford to take all these days off work, or is allowed to take their children away from school, and those who don’t attend might not send in an offering.

And some of those who do pay offerings in addition to tithes cannot afford to do so …

“… we take up offerings on these special days, and I hope all are preparing for this in advance. Sometimes people write checks for money they do not have in their accounts. Sadly, this costs them exorbitant fees, but what many do not realize is that fees are also charged to the Church. Please prepare in advance for these special days and do not give what you do not have.”

The Philadelphia Church of God expressed the same problem in 2018:

“Some members unfortunately have been over-generous. In processing holy day offerings and other donations, the business office has encountered more than 50 returned checks. A returned check ‘bounces’ because the amount written on it is higher than the amount available in the checking account. When banks process these checks, they stop the intended donation from going through and often charge the Church a fee.”

Its all about the money, plain and simple.  When will the boys ever wake up that their butt-numbing sermons are boring as hell?  Can anyone blame LCG members for skipping services?