The Ten Commandments in the Old Covenant

 

The Ten Commandments in the Old Covenant

Lonnie Hendrix

In the most recent issue of The International News, CGI’s Vance Stinson attempted to refute the notion that the Decalogue’s (Ten Commandments) inclusion in the Old Testament renders it inapplicable to the people of the New Covenant. In The Old Covenant and the Ten Commandments, he challenged New Covenant Theologyauthor Steve Lehrer’s assertion that Deuteronomy 4:13-14 inextricably binds the Ten Commandments to the Old Covenant. Mr. Stinson’s argument against this notion was presented in four points. They are: 1) “no serious theologian would ever claim that the Sinaitic Covenant consisted solely of the Ten Commandments,” 2) “no knowledgeable Bible student claims that all the laws of the Old Covenant pertain exclusively to the people under that covenant,” 3) “New Testament treatment of the Decalogue supports the Decalogue’s permanency and universality,” 4) “All conservative evangelical pastors, teachers, apologists, and theologians, as well as many outside evangelical circles, believe there is an objective universal moral law that has been in place from the beginning of human history..”

In the fourth chapter of Deuteronomy, we read: “And now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the rules that I am teaching you, and do them, that you may live, and go in and take possession of the land that the Lord, the God of your fathers, is giving you. You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you…See, I have taught you statutes and rules, as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land that you are entering to take possession of it…And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today? Only take care, and keep your soul diligently, lest you forget the things that your eyes have seen, and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your life. Make them known to your children and your children's children— how on the day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb, the Lord said to me, ‘Gather the people to me, that I may let them hear my words, so that they may learn to fear me all the days that they live on the earth, and that they may teach their children so…Then the Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of words, but saw no form; there was only a voice. And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and rules, that you might do them in the land that you are going over to possess.” (Verses 1-14, ESV)

Notice that the Ten Commandments were made an integral part of the covenant which God made with Israel. Clearly, this passage of Scripture makes very plain that the Ten Commandments were incorporated into the terms of that agreement between God and the people of Israel. In the words of Mr. Stinson, “no serious theologian” would dispute the notion that the Decalogue was included among the other statutes and promises which constituted that agreement! Likewise, “no knowledgeable Bible student” would dispute the fact that the Old Covenant was made exclusively with the children of Israel. In other words, the terms outlined in Torah (all of the terms) constituted the agreement between God and those people. Indeed, the only way that Gentiles could become part of that covenant was to join themselves to Israel and accept all of the provisions outlined in Torah.

Now, the Epistle to the Hebrews clearly states that the New Covenant renders the Old one obsolete (Hebrews 8:13). Moreover, this same chapter makes plain that the New Covenant is established on better terms and promises than those which underpinned the Old one! Hence, if we accept that the New Covenant was established on different terms and promises, and that it was intended by God to be universal – that is – open to everyone (not just the children of Israel), I would think that the next logical question is: How do the terms of the New Covenant differ from those of the Old Covenant?

According to Mr. Stinson, the New Testament supports the “permanency and universality” of the Decalogue. To support this contention, he noted that the Epistle of James enumerated a couple of the Ten Commandments. More particularly, James wrote: “If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not murder.’ If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.” (James 2:8-13)

Notice that James begins his thought by referring to Christ’s condensation of the Law into two great commandments. He mentions the second one, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Then he went on to say that violating even one of the Ten Commandments makes one guilty of violating the whole! In other words, James message here supports Christ’s summary of the terms of the Old Covenant – Torah (including the Decalogue) – into two great commandments. Moreover, James’ point reinforces Christ’s further distillation of the Law into one great principle (Matthew 7:12) – which, incidentally, was also echoed by Paul (Romans 13:9 and Galatians 5:14) and John (I John 2, 3, and 4).

Although Mr. Stinson went on to acknowledge that “the two great commandments on loving God and neighbor are a summary of the Ten Commandments,” he seems completely unable to comprehend that THIS is the very thing which Christ incorporated into the terms of the New Covenant! In other words, the Decalogue (and I would include the whole of Torah) is an elaboration of those two great commandments. To be even clearer, those two principles comprehend ALL of those individual commandments and render them redundant and unnecessary! The “plain truth” is that those two great commandments constitute the “objective, universal moral law that has been in place from the beginning of human history,” and which are the foundation of the New Covenant. Christ didn’t just fulfill the Law and the prophets by obeying and personifying them – he also fulfilled the Law by distilling it down to its ESSENCE – by making crystal clear God’s original and eternal intent! The people of Israel (operating without God’s Holy Spirit) needed a list of dos and don’ts – which they failed to follow. Christians rely on Jesus Christ and his righteousness and the guidance of the Holy Spirit to achieve God’s original intent (Love) in every aspect of their lives going forward from conversion!

The Decalogue, along with the other individual commandments of Torah, were based on those two great commandments which Christ drew from Torah! ALL of those individual commandments were an elaboration of how those principles (Love for God and neighbor) could be applied to the daily lives of the unconverted, rebellious, and stony-hearted Israelites. Christians (people in whom the Holy Spirit currently dwells) have those two principles written on their hearts. Instead of robotically following a list of dos and don’ts, Christians are learning to apply those universal principles to every area of their lives. To be sure, in so far as the individual commandments of Torah were derived from the same fundamental/universal principles, it would be inappropriate to characterize those commandments as bad, evil, unrighteous, or unimportant. We are, however, clearly stating that it is unnecessary for Christians to wade through this extensive body of legislation and decide which individual commandments are still binding on them under the terms of the present covenant!

Torah (including the Decalogue) is a shadow of the reality that Christians currently possess. Sure, it can help us to more fully understand that reality – who Christ is, what he has done for us, etc.. It cannot, however, replace that reality in our hearts and minds. Christians are circumcised in our hearts, not in our flesh (Romans 2:28-29). Christians rest from our own works in Christ, not by physically observing the Sabbath (Hebrews 4:9-10). We obey the commandments which God has given TO US through Jesus Christ, not by scrupulously observing the dos and don’ts of Torah (Romans 6:14-15, 7:6, and Galatians 5:18). Hence, while the Decalogue was an integral part of the Old Covenant, the principles which underpinned it are an integral part of the New Covenant in Christ.

 

CGI: Bill Watson’s Doctrine of ‘Changing Life Forms’

 

Bill Watson’s Doctrine of ‘Changing Life Forms’

 

By The COG Catholic

Expecting to be disappointed, I listened to CGI elder Bill Watson’s recent Armor of God episode entitled “Are We Immortal?” Unfortunately, my expectations were met.

Bill is a good and likeable guy, but he routinely misrepresents the beliefs of denominations other than his own. This is partly due to ignorance, and I'm afraid partly due to the comfort of sticking with standard-issue Armstrong narratives.

While there is much to criticize in this Armor of God episode, for now I want to highlight the irony of a particularly bizarre charge Bill makes against Christians who believe in man’s immortal soul.

Changing life forms

He claims we traditional Christians believe people “really don’t die, but instead you change life forms into some disembodied spirit and go on living consciously apart from your physical body.”

This is not the first time he has accused Christians of believing we “change life forms.” It’s part of his verbal repertoire when discussing the subject, like saying we believe our “souls waft off into heaven” when we die (I don’t know if I’ve ever heard the word waft outside of COG presentations).

But the truth is the opposite of what he claims: It is he who believes in changing life forms, and it is we in the historic Christian tradition who believe in the bodily resurrection.

What Christians actually believe

Christians from the beginning have always believed that our spirit, or soul, was created ex nihlo by God to be immortal. We are not “inherently immortal,” because only God has immortality inherently. God is, however, able to bestow the gift of everlasting existence to his creatures, just as he did for the angels.

We believe that at the conclusion of our earthly lives, our souls survive bodily death and await a bodily resurrection at the Second Coming. The eternal reward of the just will be enjoyed not in a perpetual ghostly state of “wafting,” but in the body – resurrected, reunited to our souls, glorified and immortalized.

Interestingly, Bill likes to say the concept of the immortal soul comes to us largely from pagan philosophers and gnosticism in the Early Church. But Irenaeus of Lyon (A.D. 130-202) most famously and effectively wrote against the gnostics; he did not adopt but opposed gnosticism.

As one who knew Polycarp (COGs’ favorite Early Church Father), Irenaeus wrote in his work Against Heresies(Book 5, Chapter 7) what we Christians believe regarding the body and the soul and the resurrection:

For this it [the body] is which dies and is decomposed, but not the soul or the spirit. For to die is to lose vital power, and to become henceforth breathless, inanimate, and devoid of motion, and to melt away into those [component parts] from which also it derived the commencement of [its] substance. But this event happens neither to the soul, for it is the breath of life; nor to the spirit, for the spirit is simple and not composite, so that it cannot be decomposed, and is itself the life of those who receive it. We must therefore conclude that it is in reference to the flesh that death is mentioned; which [flesh], after the soul's departure, becomes breathless and inanimate, and is decomposed gradually into the earth from which it was taken. This, then, is what is mortal. And it is this of which he also says, He shall also quicken your mortal bodies. And therefore in reference to it he says, in the first [Epistle] to the Corinthians: So also is the resurrection of the dead: it is sown in corruption, it rises in incorruption. [1 Corinthians 15:42] For he declares, That which you sow cannot be quickened, unless first it die. [1 Corinthians 15:36]

Irenaeus clearly believes in the immortal soul and the resurrection of the body. This is what practically all Christians believe.

But back to the idea of “changing life forms.”

What COGs actually believe

You, the readers of this blog, already know what COGs believe. While they scoff at the idea that death occurs when the soul separates from the body, they insist it involves the “spirit in man” separating from the body. That “spirit in man” – likened to a cassette tape or CD or USB thumb drive that contains a person’s memory and character – goes back to God and awaits a “resurrection” while resting comfortably in a deep soul sleep.

But wait – there's more!

Who really believes in changing life forms?

The irony I alluded to at the beginning of this post is that it’s not historic Christianity, but COGs who teach we will change life forms!

Think about it. COGs mean something very different by “resurrection” than what Christians do.

Christians believe explicitly in “the resurrection of the body,” which, for those who are saved, will be glorified and supernaturalized. It will “put on immortality.” And it will be reunited with the soul.

COGs, on the other hand, believe the body we have now will no longer be ours. They don’t believe “resurrection” means the coming back to life of that which was dead, but the absolute replacement of our old physical body. Our old body will be discarded, while the reawakened “spirit in man” will be inserted into an entirely different, entirely new “other” body that has no connection to our current body.

Back when God first created man, he saw everything he had made and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31), yet COGs say we will no longer even be human beings. Instead, as creatures, we will become a completely different species: “spirit beings” (a nonbiblical term, incidentally). And our bodies will be “made out of spirit.”

Of course, bodies can’t be composed or made out of spirit, since by definition spirit is incorporeal.

So what we have in COG theology is a “spirit in man" that jumps from one life form (human being) to another life form (spirit being), while taking a snooze in between the two states. That sounds an awful lot like a form of reincarnation or a transmigration of souls – an idea as pagan as pagan gets. The only difference has to do with timing and whether the soul is conscious between life forms.

The historic Christian Church takes the Bible at its word. We are mortal because our bodies are subject to corruption. One day our mortal bodies will be made immortal. The saint’s body that goes into the grave is the same body that will come out, except it will be glorified and given everlasting life.

Biblical portrayals of the other side of death indicate consciousness: Lazarus and the Rich Man, the Transfiguration, King Saul and the Witch of Endor, the martyrs crying out for vengeance in heaven.

For the sake of argument, let’s say the soul needs the body for survival (instead of the other way around), and death includes “soul sleep.”

Either way, it is the COG position that most resembles paganism, presenting the “spirit in man” as something meant to escape the fleshly body, to be placed inside a “spirit body,” and to go on living apart from the physical body.

Which is to say, COGs believe the reward of the saved is to change life forms (with a nap in between).

 

=====

The COG Catholic currently blogs at https://write.as/thecogcatholic.

 

Bob Thiel's god Is Angry!

 

The Great Bwana to Africa and 100 Caucausians had a dream come true just now. First, Southern CA is being hit with the remnant of a tropical storm from Mexico, with anticipated flooding and landslides. Now we just had an earthquake on top of it all! 

Prophecy comes alive! What a great time to be alive!!!!

Real Prophecy, Predictions or Speculation? The Continual Dance Around COG Failed Prophecies

 

One thing the Church of God movement has been good at is making prophecies that have all failed. Every single one of them, every single time. It doesn't matter if it was Herbert Armstrong, Gerald Flurry, Gerald Waterhouse, Bob Thiel, or Dave Pack. Everything they have ever predicted to happen has failed and failed epically!

When those failures happen the excuses flow faster than any river ever could. The excuses are so fast and furious that they quickly divert attention away from the failure and into a new direction. God always had something more to reveal or worse yet, God delayed the prophecy because the brethren were not ready. They were the cause of the failure. Not enough prayers, not enough money given...the reasons were endless.

When blaming the brethren did not work as well as they wanted they resorted to a new tactic. All of the failed prophecies were only speculation so therefore the prophet or church leader cannot be held accountable. It was just wishful thinking and a desire to warn people.

This brings us to today when the Philadelphia Church of God has reposted a 2007 article by King Gerald Flurry where he wrote complaining that an Edmond Oklahoma newspaper in 1994 branded him a cult leader. Nothing pops the corks of COG leaders more than being labeled as cult leaders. Flurry was still reacting in 2007 to that butthurt and then again in 2023 proving he is still bitter over the words printed in 1994. This is the same kind of childish reaction we see today in Bob Thiel and others. Butthurt"ness" runs deep in Armstrongism.

Flurry places himself right up there next to Jesus in the suffering he has to endure being a prophet of God". He writes:

Was Christ a Cult Leader? 

 

Back in 1994, a local newspaper published an article about the Philadelphia Church of God. The author titled the article, “Is It a Cult or ‘God’s Church’?” One subhead was about our unorthodox beliefs—as if that is bad. Webster’s Dictionary describes a cult as “a group with unorthodox beliefs.”

Jesus Christ had unorthodox beliefs! They were so unorthodox that they eventually got Him killed! And make no mistake about it, Christ was killed because of what He taught. The people liked Christ’s personality. “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man” (Luke 2:52). But they hated His message—and they hate Christ’s message today. That condition never changes. “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever” (Hebrews 13:8). 

Yet here we are in 2023, almost 35 years after Flurry formed the Philadelphia Church of God and he still hates Christ's message. He hated it in 1980 when he was part of the Worldwide Church of God and still hates it today in 2023. Nothing irritates COG leaders more than talking about Jesus and the acts of grace, justification, and sanctification. If they cannot bow down to the altar of the law then it is not worth talking about. The acolytes of Baal bowing down before his statue are exactly like the COG leaders today bowing down to the altar of the law with their backs turned towards Jesus. They will sacrifice their firstborn and brethren at that altar before they will turn around and be followers of The Way.

Which group hated Christ most of all? The religious people were the ones screaming, “Crucify Him, crucify Him!” False religion continues to play that role today—all over the world. “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world …” (Revelation 12:9). Satan has totally deceived this world. The world’s religions don’t know who God is! Spiritually, they don’t even know themselves!

False religion continues to this day in the Church of God movement with the 400 some splinter groups all professing a different Jesus, when and if they even dare to mention his name. Gerald Flurry, Bob Thiel, and Dave Pack have absolutely no idea who Jesus is or what the New Covenant has accomplished.

Then we get to the double-speak by Flurry about prophecy, predictions, and speculation. The dance is epic:

The reporter had this to say in his article: “During the mid-1950s, he [Mr. Armstrong] published a pamphlet entitled, ‘1975 in Prophecy.’ It warned of a worldwide nuclear war in 1972 and Christ’s return three years later. … When the world didn’t end on schedule, Armstrong withdrew his pamphlet from circulation.” I was asked about this statement before the article was published. I told the reporter that not one of Mr. Armstrong’s critics could prove that statement about the book and they never have over the years! That is because Mr. Armstrong never said those events would occur on those dates. There was only speculation that those events could happen in that time period. I took the time to explain this in detail. The reporter still wrote the same statement without proof. And so the error is perpetuated without excuse! But reporters read such statements and often believe them because there are several critics making these claims. If people hear a statement frequently enough, they often believe it.

The blatant lying by Flurry over Herbert's failed prophecy, which was NOT a prediction, but a fact that the church taught is epic here. The WCG had the fortitude to withdraw the book from publication till it could be rewritten eliminating Herbert's epic mistakes. Flurry then lies that the church never withdrew it. When it comes to rewriting Herbert Armstrong's mistakes and erasing them from memory there is no Church of God greater at doing this than the Philadelphia Church of God. They truly practice what they preach: "If people hear a statement frequently enough, they often believe it."

One religious author says a cult “is a perversion, a distortion of biblical Christianity and/or a rejection of the historic teachings of the Christian church.” But this is a great contradiction! “Historic teachings” of today’s “Christianity” itself pervert and distort “biblical Christianity”! Their “biblical Christianity” means mainstream Christianity, which is very unbiblical!

Armstrongism today perverts the message of the New Covenant. The things it does irritates the hell out of COG leaders. How dare it tell people they don't need to tithe, give offerings on non-required holy days, or offer grace and love over adherence to a law that can NEVER be kept by any human. Freedom in Christ is despised in the church. Freedom means members no longer need to submit to illogical versions of "church government" or to whack-job church leaders. Historic Armstrongism perverts and distorts the message of the New Covenant and separates its followers from the one they "claim" to follow. Their claim of practicing 1st-century Christianity is a perversion, unbiblical and blatant lie!

According to the world’s definitions of a cult, Jesus Christ was a cult leader. We must remember that making such statements can bring severe persecution! Christ proved that. He was killed for what He taught. But soon, this world is going to be severely tried for practicing such gross deceit.

Each of today's false prophets leading Churches of God will continue to lie to us, make excuses for their lies, and ultimately blame the brethren for their failures. It's time for them all to shut up and set their captives free!