Hypocritical COG Leaders Tell You to Not Vote And Yet Devote Huge Amount Of Time Preaching Politics

 

As this tumultuous election season comes close to an end and with the electoral college voting in Joe Biden as our next President, it has raised the hackles of many COG leaders.

Matthew Armstrong has been on a holy terror for the last several months with all kinds of conspiracy theories and how awful things will be under a new regime.

Gerald Flurry and his Philadelphia Church of God and Church of God Inernational have been the biggest political foghorns the church has ever seen (this year).

Flurry has been absolutely adamant that Donald Trump would be reelected and that the electoral college would vote him back in. He has expounded on this in his TV broadcasts, Twitter, Facebook, and in his church rags:

In his Philadelphia Trumpet magazine he  had this:

According to Flurry and many other COG leaders, Biden is close to ushering in the time of troubles that COG leaders are looking so eagerly forward to. Flurry even goes as far as to claim that Biden is contrary to Bible prophecy.

Lonnie Hendrix has these observations about the various COG groups sticking their noses into politics.

For several months now, I’ve been drawing attention to the blatant partisanship exhibited by many of the church organizations that have emerged from the wreckage of Herbert Armstrong’s Worldwide Church of God. Although the ACOG culture has always leaned right, like most of the rest of Americans who are so inclined, many within that culture are in the bag for Donald Trump. Perhaps this development should not have elicited such surprise and consternation on my part - as it would be completely disingenuous to suggest that we shouldn’t have expected it. After all, those who have willing given themselves to the personality cult surrounding Herbert Armstrong and his teachings were bound to have a predisposition for joining the cult of personality surrounding Trump! 

 

Predictably, Gerald Flurry’s Philadelphia Church of God is completely in the bag for Trump. In a recent offering at the Trumpet.com, Brad MacDonald wrote: “Mr. Biden has a long, easily proven track record of political corruption. The Hunter Biden scandal shone the light of truth on this reality just days before the election. Joe Biden supports both Antifa and Black Lives Matter. He also has a record of rejecting the rule of law and the Constitution (for example, he is a key member of the Obama-led cabal behind the Mueller report and impeachment trial, both of which were unconstitutional). Meanwhile, Kamala Harris, the candidate for vice president, is even more far left than Joe Biden.” – Thanks to Democracy, America is Over, Virtually 

 

MacDonald continued: “To choose Joe Biden and his radical agenda, one must suffer from at least one of two basic flaws in thinking. First, he would have to be totally ignorant of the facts illuminating Mr. Biden’s condemning record, his radical policies and his sadistic ambitions for America. Second, a person must not sufficiently value America’s continuation as a capitalist Republic, its political and social stability, and the general idea of traditional America. He mustn’t value America’s Constitution, the rule of law, and its Judeo-Christian heritage and morality. As president, Mr. Biden would assault all of these.” – same article reference above
Mr. MacDonald concluded his diatribe with a discourse on the failure of democracy in America. His reasoning – Since a majority of Americans were stupid enough to vote for Joe Biden (instead of the obvious choice, Donald Trump), democracy has failed. The underlying thesis, of course, is that America’s only hope is Trump staging a successful coup, overthrowing the results of the election and continuing in office! 

 

It should be noted that MacDonald’s effort was intended as a companion piece to the main offering in this regard provided by none other than the notorious pastor general of the PCOG, Gerald Flurry. In an article entitled Donald Trump Is Going to Win This Election (penned November 9), Mr. Flurry wrote: “Regardless of how things look right now, I am confident that Donald Trump will remain president.” See Flurry Article at Trumpet.com He continued: “The radical left in America have done everything in their power for the last four years to discredit and destroy Donald Trump. They have spied. They have lied. They have cheated. They have broken laws too numerous to count. They have committed treason, trying to depose the duly elected government! And somehow, President Trump has weathered all those storms.” He went on to declare that “a Biden presidency is contrary to Bible prophecy.” Really, that will come as quite a shock to millions of Christian Americans! 

 

Flurry went on to say: “The mainstream media insist there is “no evidence” the Democrats tried to steal this election. This is patently false: There is plenty of evidence. But it is also absurd, when you think about what the left has been doing for the past several years! You would have to be naive not to think they are committing great frauds with this election.” He continued: “I also marvel that so many people voted for the radical platform the Democratic Party has embraced. They want to encourage illegal immigration, even giving them free health care and welfare and education. They want to ravage the economy to combat “climate change.” They accept radical racist ideals and far-out sexual practices. They applaud lawlessness and a spirit of insurrection. It doesn’t take much to understand that in a democracy, when that many people are so ignorant, it is over. This nation is lost, virtually.” 

 

“Oh well, that’s crazy Gerry and his minions!” some will innocently declare. “You can’t paint the entire culture with that paintbrush.” 

 

Nevertheless, I have pointed out some of the very partisan articles and sermons delivered by “moderate” Church of God International pastors, Bill Watson and Adrian Davis. And those gentlemen apparently aren’t the only “reasonable” ACOG folks who have fallen into this partisan trap! 

 

Dave Havir’s Church of God Big Sandy has published some very interesting articles in the latest edition of their Eye on the World. In an article entitled No Time for Phony Healing by Michelle Malkin, we read: “We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, do not forgive. We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, do not forget. We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, do not surrender. We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, resoundingly reject the phony olive branches of former Vice President Joe Biden. After liberal media operatives prematurely declared Biden the winner of election 2020 this weekend, Biden’s handlers carefully trotted him out in front of the cameras to read a script that proclaimed: “It’s time to put away the harsh rhetoric, to lower the temperature, to see each other again, to listen to each other again.” 

 

The author’s response to Biden’s overture: “This is the time for hell-raising, not healing. Every legal vote must be counted, every illegal vote thrown out, every lawsuit heard. Anything less amounts to exactly the kind of “coup” undermining the “peaceful transition of power” that anti-Trump forces falsely accused our president of perpetrating. We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, resist the media-Silicon Valley coronation of Biden-Harris. We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, do not relent. We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, do not yield. We, the 71 million Americans who voted to reelect Donald J. Trump, do not concede.” 

 

How can anyone claim with a straight face that the rejection of forgiveness, the offer of an olive branch, reconciliation and humility be characterized as "Christian"? Do Christians advocate for "hell-raising, not healing"? Indeed, I can't imagine anything being more antithetical to the tenets of the Christian religion! 

 

Now, it is true that Pastor Havir prefaced these offerings with a disclaimer: “This compilation of material for “Eye on the World” is presented as a service to the Churches of God. The views stated in the material are those of the writers or sources quoted by the writers, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the members of the Church of God Big Sandy. The following articles were posted at churchofgodbigsandy.com for the weekend of Nov. 14, 2020.” Nevertheless, I fail to see how the inclusion of this material could be considered to be rendering "a service to the Churches of God."Moreover, another article in the same offering dealing with the political cult of personality surrounding Trump was prefaced with this qualifier: “Following is a letter from an individual who claims that “[President] Trump has succeeded in creating a cult.” This letter probably reflects the opinion of 90 percent of the corporate media and many of the population that voted against President Trump. (For the record—Although the current vote tally has half of the voting population as voting against President Trump, not all of them would go so far as to claim that his supporters are members of a Trump cult.)" 

 

Now, while I’m confident that most of the folks in the ACOG culture will be perplexed that anyone could find fault with these offerings, I am also confident that objective Christians will find these remarks to be very objectionable. Once again, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A REPUBLICAN OR A TRUMP SUPPORTER TO BE A CHRISTIAN! Unlike Herbert Armstrong, I do not have any problems with Christians voting or expressing opinions about the moral implications of policy, but I do object to ministers announcing the correct political view from the pulpit! And we should all be able to recognize the fact that such offerings severely curtail the appeal of any religious message offered by these groups. After all, almost 80 million Americans voted for Joe Biden and telling them that they are ignorant and Satanic for doing so is NOT likely to make them very receptive to any appeal offered by these folks.


- Lonnie Hendrix aka Miller Jones

Gerald Weston On Democracy

 

From an LCG source:

(Gerald) Weston said,

"But neither democracy nor a military approach correspond to the model Christ gave us."

I agree with the military comment, but the democracy comment is 100% incorrect.

Jesus used the Greek democratic "ekklesia/ecclesia" to describe his model. Even if he didn't intend for every detail of a Greek ecclesia to be mimicked, his first followers would have immediately associated it with a democratic approach. 

From “The Assembly,” C. Blackwell, ed., Dēmos: Classical Athenian Democracy :

The Assembly (ecclesia) was the regular opportunity for all male citizens of Athens to speak their minds and exercise their votes regarding the government of their city. It was the most central and most definitive institution of the Athenian Democracy.

From Encyclopedia Britannica entry "Democracy":

What political institutions are necessary for governing?—the Athenians adopted an answer that would appear independently elsewhere. The heart and centre of their government was the Assembly (Ecclesia), which met almost weekly—40 times a year—on the Pnyx, a hill west of the Acropolis. Decisions were taken by vote, and, as in many later assemblies, voting was by a show of hands. As would also be true in many later democratic systems, the votes of a majority of those present and voting prevailed. 

 

Aside from the question of whether Jesus and the Apostles restricted participation to only males, the pertinent issue in this discussion is whether Jesus endorsed a democratic model. If he did not then he would not have used "ecclesia" to describe what he was building, because the people of his time would have known exactly what an ecclesia was, and that it involved direct participation in decision making by all the members of the group, so it would not have made sense to use "ecclesia" if he meant an elite hierarchy or corporation.

If Jesus had meant to adopt a human hierarchy with governance by a few then he would have used another term besides "ecclesia" to describe what he was building such as "dikasteria," which was a smaller group that served as a powerful court, or "aristocracy," “the rule of what Herodotus called ‘the one man, the best’” Ancient Greek Democracy

Or Jesus could have said he would build his "boule" which was a "council of 500 men, appointed annually by lot from among citizens aged at least thirty, and with severe restrictions on repeated membership. Its chief function was to prepare the agenda for meetings of the ekklesia, and to undertake certain routine administrative duties, in particular, that of coordinating the activities of numerous boards of minor officials" A Glossary of Athenian Legal Terms

King James I had the same concern about government and ecclesiastical authority that Gerald Weston has, and so when he authorized the English translation of the Bible, he made sure to give the translators the rule:

"The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the Word Church not to be translated Congregation etc."

This is where King James insisted that when the translators find the word ecclesia that they make sure to substitute the traditional institutional word "Church" and not use a proper translation of "congregation" like Tyndale used and was murdered for. What would be King James’s motive for forbidding the proper translation of ecclesia and using "Church" instead? I think the answer should be obvious, but it has to do with maintaining a separation between clergy and laity and ensuring that the authorized translation supported ecclesiastical authority over and repression of the masses. The COGs today fall right in line with King James’s rule when they insist that their groups must use the term "Church of God" to be valid.

Even the popular ISBE (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia) says this in the first line of the entry “Church”:

The word "church," which is derived from kuriakos, "of or belonging to the Lord," represents in the English Versions of the Bible of the New Testament the Greek word ekklesia; Latin, ecclesia.” 

 

What this is saying is that “church” is not derived from ekklesia, and that English Bibles substitute (“represent”) the Greek word ekklesia with the English word “church.” So, if Jesus had meant “church” then he would have used the Greek word kuriakos.

Democratic ecclesia didn't mean lack of leadership as would be the accusation to this by the aristocracy in the COGs, and it’s why teaching discernment to the followers of Jesus is so important. The Greek ecclesia had heralds whose job it was to make sure everyone who wanted to speak had an opportunity. This freedom to speak presented the risk of an ecclesia getting out of control, thus,

  This freedom to speak was not absolute or without regulation. Aeschines tells us, for example, that in the early democracy (before the 5th century) citizens over 50 years of age could speak first, and only after those had their say could younger men speak. Other formal restrictions could apply, such as decrees limiting discussion of certain topics to certain meetings of the Assembly (C. Blackwell).

Adam and Eve Were Mid-Brown Skinned

 

Below are excerpts from an article in Church of God Outreach Ministries New Horizons emagazine, Sept/Oct., 2020.

This will be sure to get the staunch British Israelite white Anglo-Saxon supporters into a tizzy when it states that there is "less than 0.012%" genetic difference between us (races). For some reason, it is vitally important that a pure white bloodline is in existence to ensure Jesus has a throne to come back and sit upon. It is important to those Armstrongite followers who demand that British Israelism be true, that white people be the savior of humanity, while the "gentiles" are the problem creators in society. This is the belief taught by the church for decades and which I heard preached in the Cincinnati and Dayton church often, particularly in the midst of some race-related issue happening in society.

Does God see us in colour? After all, He created us with the in-built potential through our genes to be born in a variety of ‘colours’. So that’s what we must discuss.

Difference

Variation in appearance is deceptive. The apostle Paul notes that ‘...[God] has made all nations of men of one blood [DNA] to dwell on all the face of the earth, ordaining fore-appointed seasons and boundaries of their dwell- ing’ (Acts 17:26) - a position backed by biology. (For example, ‘black’ and ‘white’ can exchange blood, given the usual medical precautions.)

Despite skin shading from albino white to purple-black, analysis determines that there is less than 0.012% difference genetically between any of us. And there is one major pigment to determine our skin shade. It is melanin, and the amount present in each of us provides our ‘colour’. The level present is genetically determined by a cluster of genes. It’s the same for our other features.

Science no longer believes that each ‘race’ derives from a different animal forebear but that all of us are from a single stock (dubbed ‘mitochondrial Eve’). Bible believers ascribe this to the creation of ‘man’, Adam—in whom was created the complete gene pool. Necessarily ‘Eve’ was created contemporaneously with Adam, and sharing his DNA.

Division

While not explicitly stated it is most likely that our first parents, median between ’black’ and ’white’ range, were of a mid-brown skin shade.

As the DNA in Adam’s offspring became randomly mixed down the generations there was potential, through natural selection, for a range of skin pigment and other features to manifest in populations. Over the centuries relationships between the like-minded would tend to form specific macro people groups and, ultimately, nations—Caucasoid (Semitic), Mongoloid, Hamitic and many other sub-groups, as indeed exist today. (The terms derive from Noah’s sons Shem, Japheth and Ham.)

Post-flood, Noah and his family carried the complete gene pool of three billion human genes into our present world system. The scattering by language subsequent to Babel coupled with environmental factors (eg light skinned occupying higher or lower latitudes) would reinforce familial characteristics. These characteristics are stated in the Scriptures to continue throughout the millennial reign of Jesus (Rev 20:8, Isaiah 19:23).

It is noteworthy that although we all share the same DNA yet God has also set—and controls— boundaries for our various geographical settlements (Acts 17:26).

The article ends with this:

In sum, God has enabled a variety of varied ‘people groups‘ to populate His special planet. The reality is that we are all different. By accident of our birth we become part of an established nation in which a specific skin colour and culture predominates; by in-born nature we are loyal to it, patriotic, submit to its laws and culture.

Christians are ‘...strangers and pilgrims’. As such we, too, are to emulate the Father and to be ‘colour blind’—in and out of ‘church’.