Dave Pack: Mind the Gap

 

Mind The Gap

 

David C. Pack of The Restored Church of God was experiencing the cold sweats of withdrawals from not speaking. I have been monitoring him closely since Part 353 in March of 2022. The longest he has gone without the soothing limelight bathing him in rapturous glory has been thirteen days.

 

Flashback Part 418 – February 9, 2023

@ 01:48 But, I love words. They are (I guess) my heroin.

 

Boy. He was not kidding. He was more correct than he knew.

 

In the past seventeen months, David C. Pack has not gone longer than thirteen days without speaking.

 

I thought he was going to break his record this month, but alas, it was not meant to be. His itching teeth were too much to bear because “The Greatest Unending Story! (Part 463)” was given on August 19, 2023. The Gap Clock was reset. The ringing in his ears was abated.

 

The gap in speaking creates a ripple effect of gaps in reporting. The Opening Night of the Feast of Tabernacles on September 29 at sunset is still when Jesus Christ will return. Subject to change, and change will be the subject soon.*

 

 

Since it has come up in private messages and in the comments section, the reason there have been no new articles is two-fold. After almost two weeks of blissful silence, Part 463 was plain boring. Dave repackaged some old material he had forgotten and stamped it with an "I wish I knew that sooner" label. Nothing was pressing to report.

 

The other side is that I have been busy. I let the comfortable silence marinade.

 

Dennis Diehl gave me some sage advice early on, "Don't write unless you have something to say." The website is an information hub with timely, relevant news reporting. It is not entertainment. Since there is no internal pressure to produce content to gain followers or generate income, when Dave is silent, I can follow suit.

 

There are over 200 other articles on exrcg.org for people to catch up with if they discover the website. The Feast countdown clock keeps ticking on the landing page. And Former Sixth King Mister Vladimir Putin still needs someone else to start his car in the morning.

 

When significant changes are announced, you will read it here.

 

 

Within the first sixty seconds of Part 463, it was clear Dave planned to perform a stealth rebranding of The Kingdom to Israel.

 

Part 463 – August 19, 2023

@ 00:37 So, we’re gonna ask this question: When is the Initial Kingdom of God? When is the Initial Kingdom of God? And maybe even what is it? What is (when is) what is the Initial Kingdom of God? The Bible talks about three measures.

 

@ 01:33 But we’ve gotta look at how the Scriptures say the Initial Kingdom of God looks.

 

Dave plays a shell game with words. He preps the church for a new timeline but does not reveal it in Part 463. By introducing the new phrase "Initial Kingdom of God," he can save face by manipulating language for when he later shifts the First Kingdom timeline or adds back in a fourth iteration. Flip a coin to figure out which.

 

@ 25:16 I never did the exercise we’re about to culminate with. Never did it. I wish I had. It would have made things a lot simpler.

 

Drum roll. This must be something nobody has ever heard before.

 

@ 26:34 “…to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.” Wow. So, every time Christ came back in the other Gospels and, He's preaching the Kingdom of God. Luke is telling us He’s preaching the first year? Wow. The first year IS the Kingdom of God. Not in power in the same way, but it’s immensely powerful.

 

Some may think when I write about Dave suffering from the early onset of dementia or Alzheimer's, those are somehow stabs at dark humor. No. He must be losing his mind if he believes this is new material because he is presenting like this is a mind-blowing revelation of essential knowledge.

 

@ 28:02 So, we’re gonna look for the rest of the sermon at what it means to have this year that is the Kingdom of God.

 

@ 28:30 So, when is the Initial Kingdom of God? It is the year. Now, here’s what was so difficult. Can this also be restoring the kingdom to Israel? Oh, that’s been a bugaboo. You've heard me say, "You cannot have the Kingdom of God, and it's the Kingdom to Israel."

 

As it turns out, the Kingdom to Israel IS the Kingdom of God. Though, he never said that. Instead, he spent 25 minutes retreading verses to make a point that never culminates.

 

If this idea is so new, how come I already knew it?

 

Dave was the one who separated the Kingdom to Israel of Acts 1:6 from the Kingdom of God in the first place. Not the Bible. That concept was entirely his brain-baby, but he forgot he sired it.

 

This does not feel like Part 463 but rather Part 263. Nobody at Headquarters tapped Dave on the shoulder to replay all the sermons where he had already covered this type of content. It is not new material, folks. It is a remix of side points he swept into one bin to toss on the brethren as if it were game-changing confetti. David C. Pack is the Rip Taylor of bible prophecy.

 

 

@ 58:25 We're gonna come back soon. We’ve gotta consider exactly what is the Feast of Ingathering at the end of the year. Has the church fully understood this? Or might we find we’ve got it in the wrong place? And maybe our wait is not quite as long as we think it is. We’ll soon cover other very important things. Good night.”

 

By the end of the uninspired message, it was obvious Dave had not spent thirteen days studying the content for Part 463. This was a filler message to prepare the brethren for more changes to come.

 

Early reports on Part 464* last night confirm my hunches. Expect more Dave updates more frequently on the horizon. It appears the gap has been filled.

Marc Cebrian

See: Mind the Gap

Why we will not be “God as God is God” – Part 2

“And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them”.

From a post-resurrection appearance of Jesus. (Luke:43-44)

 

                               Why we will not be “God as God is God” – Part 2

Against the Armstrongist Doctrine of Becoming God

By Scout

“God then purposed to reproduce himself, through humans, made in his image and likeness…” - Herbert W. Armstrong, Mystery of the Ages, p. 94, 1985. 

“It cannot be repeated too often:  We were born for the express purpose of literally becoming equal with the creator of the universe — members in the same eternally ruling God Family-Kingdom. But what will we be like?  Like God!  Exactly! Exactly like God!”  - Robert L. Kuhn, “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

“Thus said the Lord, The King of Israel, their Redeemer, the Lord of Hosts, I am the first and the last, and there is no God but me…”  -  Isaiah 44:6, Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition.  

 

Part 1 is at: Why We will not be “God as God is God” – Part 1   

Section I (Continued): Ontological Differences between God and Resurrected Humans

Ontology refers to God’s eternal existential nature and essence. I believe this roughly corresponds to Robert L. Kuhn’s concept of being “qualitatively” like God. The question we seek to resolve is whether resurrected humans are ontologically the same as God. If resurrected humans are different from God ontologically, then the God-as-is-God trope fails. Below are some points at issue:

God is not constructed of parts and humans are: Humans are dependent on the functioning of internal body parts for life to be sustained. We are contingent on a beating heart. God does not have parts in his essence. He is not a composite. He is what Thomas Aquinas calls a simple being. A simple being is a free, necessary being. If God is reliant on eternal parts to sustain life, then he is not necessary. He is dependent on something and this means that he is not all powerful. And then there is the chicken and egg crisis. Did the necessary heart, if there were such, come first or did the necessary God come first? And then there is the origin question. Who designed and created the heart so God could have life? These are other similar questions must be resolved in order to support the theory that God has a composite body. 

 
Humans will have an embodied resurrection as Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 15. The implication of this, drawing on our human experience, is that we will be dependent on our bodies for the full experience of life. We might use the term “packaged” instead of embodied. Our sensory capabilities, for instance, will be packaged in our resurrection bodies. We will have seeing eyes. I doubt they will be there just for ornamentation. Maybe we will have super eyesight that we cannot now imagine but this sense will be implemented in our eyes. An embodied resurrection implies that our bodies will not be superfluous but will be an essential package of capabilities and attributes.

Jesus is fully God and fully man. He is God in essence but also has a body. We will have a body like his in the resurrection (Philippians 3:21). Jesus in his resurrected human manifestation ate fish with the disciples. This implies that his resurrection body had some internal parts that handled the processing of the fish like a human body, even though such processing might be very different from the processing we know. But Jesus, unlike us, is also fully God and so eating fish does not mean he is dependent on bodily functions such as food and a digesting stomach.

Further, if we are comprised of sarx (flesh), psuche (animating principle) and pneuma (spirit), as people in the time of Jesus believed, then our resurrected bodies will also be an assembly of parts. We will lose the perishable parts (sarx and psuche as the ancients believed) and these will be replaced by similar non-perishable parts in which the non-perishable pneuma (pneuma being our personality, consciousness, intellection and mentation) will be housed. At a minimum, in the resurrection humans will consist of two parts: resurrection body and pneuma. If God is not dependent on bodily parts and resurrected humans will be dependent on parts in their resurrected state, then resurrected humans will be ontologically different from God.

 
God alone is self-existent: God the Father is self-existent (John 5:26). Jesus in his pre-existent state as the Logos was self-existent (John 1:4). Jesus, fully God and fully man, in his present state is self-existent (John 5:26). Paul wrote, in Timothy 6:16, of God “Who only hath immortality (athanasia)”. The Persons of God are self-existent because they are uncreated. Humans will always possess a derivative and contingent existence because they are created (Col 1:16-17), whether in the flesh and blood state or the resurrected state. The uncreated God will create resurrected human beings but it stands to reason that he can also reverse the process and terminate resurrected human beings if he ever so willed. It is not logical that God could do something that he could not undo. This would violate his absoluteness. Because humans, even resurrected humans, have imparted life sustained by God rather than inherent, uncreated life, they are ontologically different from God.

Other issues could be considered. But for purposes of an elementary proof this should suffice. The upshot is that human beings in their resurrected state will substantially differ from God in ontology. And because the difference is in ontology, the very predicate of being, resurrected human beings will not be different from God in just degree but in category. Resurrected human beings will not be equal to God in any sense. They will be subordinate to God both ontologically and economically.

Section II: Our Participation in the Divine Economy

While resurrected humans are not going to share the ontology of God in the future, resurrected humans will share in the divine economy – what Kuhn refers to as being quantitatively like God. Resurrected humans will be immortal, not through self-existence, but through the faithful sustaining of God. Resurrected humans will be equipped for usefulness and servant leadership. And I expect God will delegate to resurrected humans work and responsibilities at a level that is appropriate. What resurrected humans do will be a finite and quantitative involvement and it will be spectacular, but it will not even remotely rise to the level of being God. Everything that God delegates to resurrected human beings will be something he could have done himself. Borrowing a concept from C.S. Lewis, God will give us the dignity of causation. He could do it all himself but he is going to let us participate.

Section III: Why Armstrongism Created the God-as-God-is-God Concept (God Reproducing Himself)

I don’t know.

Coda

God-as-God-is-God is something that even Armstrongists do not believe in without qualification. Robert L. Kuhn gave expanded definition to this topic back in the Seventies and stated that resurrected humans will have equality with God qualitatively (ontologically) but not quantitatively (in economy). It is actually the case that resurrected humans will be neither qualitatively nor quantitatively, in Kuhn’s parlance, equal to God. The equality term drops out of the equation. Resurrected humans will participate in the divine economy to a degree but will not be like God ontologically – like what he is in his existential nature. Resurrected humans will not be equal to God in the essence of his being but like him in the application of his energies – much scaled down. The God-as-God-is-God mantra should be replaced by simply referring to resurrected Christians as the “children of God” as the Bible most often does – partakers in but not full possessors of the Divine Nature. Being a child of God is not a bad future.

 
Afterword

I believe Armstrongists are unique among those who profess to believe in the God of the Bible in that to assert that God is actually much greater than what HWA thought him to be makes them angry. They seem to want to believe in a limited God who is nothing more than a more powerful human being. It’s as if God is just the big kid on the block. The big kid is just like all the little guys, he is just bigger and so gets his way. But one day, the little guys grow up. This reductionism applied to God, making God to be in our image, makes the idea of God-as-God-is-God seem attainable for humans. Armstrongists can be just like the big kid – maybe so close to being like God, it’s not worth mentioning – perhaps, differing in only a quarter of inch in height. Not only would they rather believe HWA’s words than the Bible, HWA’s homespun words actually suit them – it matches how they want to think about God. But, alas, God is absolute and scales of measurement do not apply to him and Armstrongists need to seriously revise their Doctrine of God if they continue to hold these views.

Kuhn, Robert L. “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

 

Sproul, R.C. “What’s the Difference Between the Ontological and Economic Trinity?”: 

Note: This essay analyzes the doctrine of becoming God as presented in Classical Armstrongism. Robert L. Kuhn published in the Seventies.  I do not know how denominations derived from the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) now state this doctrine. Also, the words “ontology” and “economy”, in the theological sense, are nowhere used in Armstrongist literature that I can find.

 

 

Gloria in Excelsis Deo

Gerald Flurry: I'm Ok Being A Cult Leader Because Christ Was One Too!

Nothing infuriates Church of God splinter group leaders more than having their little groups referred to as a cult. How dare people do such a thing! After all, Christ was a cult leader just like they are. Since he preaches just like Christ did (supposedly), they are in the same boat that he was when it comes to having epitaphs hurled at them. The problem with that reasoning is not one single COG splinter group leader preaches Christ or even knows him intimately. The new has never been made new and the old still remains old. The new covenant is borderline blasphemy while the old covenant reigns supreme and kills the heart and soul.

When Flurry took his cult to Edmond Oklahoma and started his building campaigns, the local citizenry took notice. Area newspapers and news stations started exposing him in glaring details. That still pushes Flurry's buttons today, much like Bob Thiel still overreacting to Living Church of God kicking him to the curb.

This week Flurry sent out a rerun of his 2007 article whining about the persecution from the local news sources.

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).

Armstrongism has hated the New Covenant message for decades and still does today. Talk about grace, sanctification, and justification and their noses curl up in mocking disdain. In their eyes, grace is nothing more than the license to sin. Christians are sinners while they, the near-perfect law keepers are the true Christians who conveniently ignore that they are constantly breaking the very law they hawk in their magazines and sermons. A set of laws that none of them keep or can ever keep properly. Heck, they can't even keep the sabbath properly and constantly look to find all kinds of convenient ways to do what they want that day.

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!

Flurry and his ilk continue to play the role today of deceiving the world about Jesus. They have no idea who he is because they do not even know themselves! Even the most nominal Christians know far more about Jesus and the New Covenant than any COG leader can ever claim to know.

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.

See how easily and deceitfully they jump around Herb's false prophecy that the church promoted in the 70's. Flurry and others continue to LIE that Herb and the church ever said such things as fact. 

Religion today has a similar problem. They have heard false teachings for years and they believe these false doctrines rather than what the Bible actually teaches. It will take years for these people to unlearn the errors before they can be deeply taught God’s truth! 

False teachers in the Church of God movement have had a field day over the last few decades as many of them set off on their own in self-righteous indignation and formed new splinter personality cults. They follow the supposed "rediscovery" of lost doctrines and teachings, that God was so incompetent in preserving for 1,900 years, till Herb found it in a Portland library in the 1930's. It has taken COG members decades to discard those erroneous teachings and unlearn the lies and half-truths the church taught.  

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! 

Note the following on how pseudo-Christian cult leaders like Flurry manipulate followers:

"In recent international scientific literature, the authors, for reasons of tolerance and political correctness, normally tend to use such term as the New Religious Movements (NRM). There are a lot of law-abiding, non-violent citizens among the followers of the new occult, mystical, teachings, and postmodern concepts, while a certain percentage of active followers being overt criminals. We fully share the position of those scientists who have a comprehensive approach to this issue, avoiding a biased attitude, or any one-sided tendency to blame all NRM followers [17, 18].

The criminals of the 21st century, who act under the guise of missionaries, preachers, gurus, or spiritual mentors are highly professional. They resort to deception or breach of trust with a wide range of means and techniques, such as persuasion, hypnosis, threats/intimidation (mental violence). But it is the manipulation technologies that are the most efficient and widespread.

Once a victim joins a sect, the organizers do their best to kill his/her moral and ethical attitudes and form emotional dependence on the criminal leader (guru) or the most influential members of the group [19-21]. Such manipulations deprive mentally competent people of the ability to act on their own, turning them into demotivated creatures. The scope of their interests dramatically degrades, with the progressive destruction of the goal-setting ability. Further on, new incentive functions, crucial motives, conclusions (such as you’ve made the right choice) are imposed, and a total restructuring of the victims' conceptual hierarchy takes place. The victim's mindset is deprived of flexibility, logic, and criticality. With all consequent, regular manipulative impacts on the cognitive sphere of victims, the criminals get full control over the helpless state of the followers, making the sect members always committed only to the destructive behaviour model [22-24]."

A little later in the same paper, there is this:

What drives people who being competent turn to semi-legal (sometimes forbidden, destructive and nonconventional) cults, or pseudo-religious groups? 

 

Consider the subjective circumstances. Firstly, it is the boredom, the idle curiosity, the wish to touch something mysterious, exotic, or merely find some new, unconventional sources of information. The second circumstance is the fact that some people get disappointed in the traditional religions and family values. They feel frustrated about their lives facing a deep spiritual crisis. They try to overcome their frustration and get away from all problems by finding their soul mates. The third circumstance (however paradoxical it may seem) is the desire of some creatively thinking young people (especially those impulsive, prone to making snap decisions, but with no sufficient knowledge on manipulation) to grasp the true essence of the world. Such people are not satisfied with their role as consumers of information garbage. They want to be thoughtful observers of what is happening around them. Therefore, they address sectarians to get the answers to their questions. The fourth circumstance is an evident manifestation of the age-old prejudices and superstitions, which are still very much alive within all social groups and do not depend on the level of education, intelligence, or life experience of an individual. People still believe that esotericism can save them from all their trials and tribulations [48, 49]. Objective circumstances include effective ways to influence the psyche, as well as content created at a professional level. Destructive content captures the imagination of a person and deprives him of criticism. Victims lose the ability to act on their own [50, 51]. Destructive nature of manipulative content, created by leaders of totalitarian pseudo- religious cults

Today's members in groups like the Philadelphia Church of God, Restored Church of God, and the improperly named "continuing" Church of God have lost their ability to act on their own. To think and discern rationally is anathema to the great leader had his demands.

Flurry continues: 

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.

Yes, Christ was killed for what he taught, but Church of God leaders will not be persecuted for being Christ's followers when they do not even know the guy. The current "persecutions" today's COG leaders all whine about has nothing to do with "preaching boldly" but everything to do with the asinine teacings they foster off as 1st-century truths

Former WCG Member Lacking In Common Sense Asks Crackpot Prophet Which COG He/She Should Attend

 

The Great Bwana to Africa and 100 Caucasians posted a "letter" he claims to have received from a former Worldwide Church of God member supposedly asking him which Church of God he/she should attend and support. While I know this is a rerun of a rerun of a rerun, it is still an appalling letter.

This is truly pathetic that a human being with a supposed mental capacity to make decisions and use wise discernment has to ask a certified false prophet and self-appointed splinter group leader what to do! This is appalling in so many ways, not only for this individual but for Bwana Bob too. The Great Bwana Bob Mzungu thought it was a wise thing to post such a humiliating letter of a former member who was incapable of using wise discernment, a person who could not discern which COG to attend and was even blinded to Bwana Bob's cult, the one and only TRUE Church of God. Apparently running the greatest Church of God in human history had no meaning to this poor former WCG member.

He posts:

A while back, I received an email from a former Worldwide Church of God member that included the following:

I AM CONCERNED ABOUT SOME ISSUES OF MR. …. BELIEF AND APPARENTLY YOU DON’T AGREE WITH. I DON’T THINK THAT ANY OF THESE CHURCHES AGREE WITH OTHER SO WHO DO YOU GO WITH? … 

 

SOME OF GERALD FLURRY’S TEACHINGS ARE COMPLETELY WRONG AND HE’S GONE FAR OUT ON SOME THINGS SUCH AS ARMSTRONG’S STONE REPLACING JACOB’S. MANY, MANY PLACES IN THE BIBLE STATES THAT CHRIST IS THAT ROCK AND IT’S SPIRITUAL. CHRIST DOESN’T NEED A ROCK. FLURRY BASED HIS THEORY ON THE IDEA THAT COME KIDS STOLE JACOB’S ROCK FROM ENGLAND. THAT’S AMAZING SINCE IT WEIGHS OVER 350 LBS. I’VE READ OTHER LITERATURE THAT THE STONE IS STORED IN SCOTLAND.FALSE PREACHER #1 

 

I SAW A DAVID PACK SERMON ON THE INTERNET ABOUT THE 2 WITNESSES . HE SAID THAT THEY ARE IN HIS CHURCH RIGHT NOW. I BELIEVE HE’S NOW PULLED THAT SERMON BECAUSE I COULDKN’T FIND IT NOW. FALSE PREACHER #2 

 

I SAW A SERMON BY THE LIVING CHURCH OF GOD ABOUT THE MARK OF THE BEAST AND THE PRESENTER SAID WITHOUT HESITATION THAT THE MARK OF THE BEAST IS SUNDAY WORSHIP. PERIOD.. HE MADE NO MENTION OF ANY MARKS ON YOUR BODY OR 666. SABBATH MAY HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT, BUT THERE WILL BE OTHER FACTORS. YOU LEFT BECAUSE OF DOCTRINE. I’LL ????????? …. 

 

NOW I COME TO … A FALSE TEACHER … 

 

YOU SEE HOW A PERSON COULD BE DECEIVED? 

 

PLEASE ADVISE

It boggles my mind that this person had to ask Bwana Bob what to do. This is one of the marks of cults where members cannot make decisions on their own without getting permission from the leadership.

After another little bitchfest about how the Living Church of God ignored him, he wrote:

Anyway, here is what I responded to the former WCG member with:

Dear …: 

 

As I have repeatedly written at COGwriter, I doubt that David Pack or Gerald Flurry are converted.

I consider that the only COG that is Philadelphian is the CCOG–though not all in CCOG are Philadelphian and there are Philadelphians not in CCOG–but no other COG represents the continuation of Philadelphia. 

 

You should use God’s criteria, and none other to decide. 

 

Here are two links you should read and pray about if you are truly serious: How does the Continuing Church of God differ from other Sabbatarian COG groups? 

 

Does the CCOG have the confirmed signs of Acts 2:17-18? (hyperlinks deliberately removed)

 

But most refuse to believe and use their own standards. 

 

Best regards,

Bob Thiel

P.S. The same former WCG member sent me a follow-up email after I posted this. Here is some of what he wrote (Note: This is a different Mr. … in a different COG than the one alluded to above):

ALSO, I’M NOT HAPPY WITH … IN THIS RESPECT—–I’VE BEEN IN THE CHURCH FOR A WHILE AND ONE OF THE 1ST THINGS I NOTICED IS THAT THEY HAVE LEFT OUT 1/3RD OF THE BIBLE AND THAT PERTAINS TO PROPHECY. I KNOW THIS PANDEMIC CAUGHT THEM UNAWARE AS MR. … DIDN’T CALL FOR A PRAYER AND FAST INTIL THE PANDEMIC WAS IN FULL FORCE. SOME WATCHMAN

I WROTE A PERSONAL LETTER TO MR. … ADVISING HIM THAT ALL SCRIPTURE IS TO BE TAUGHT, AND HE NEEDS TO CRY OUT AND SPARE NOT. THE LATEST ISSUE OF OUR MAGAZINE FINALLY WOKE THEM UP AS THERE WERE SEVERAL MEANINGFUL ARTICLES REGARDING THE TIMES AND PROPHECY ALSO, HE SAID THAT THEY NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB IN BEING A WATCHMAN. THIS IS THE 1ST TIME IN 25 YEARS THAT THEY STARTED TO WAKE UP ON PROPHECY. 

 

My response to the above was to tell him that the COG he attends as well as a group that came out of it do not teach much about prophecy. They also have a lot of prophetic errors. For details on 50+ prophetic errors that the groups other than CCOG have...

One of the biggest false prophets and liars about prophecy is condemning other COG's because they don't talk about prophecy as he does. Some things in Armstrongism never change!

The absurdities in Bob's article ends with this gem of nonsense:

Which Church would Jesus Choose?
If you are looking for a true Christian church, how should you choose? Should you choose based upon any building(s) used? Is the criteria in the Bible? What are some widespread ‘doctrines’ that many churches teach that were not part of the original faith? Do Christians go to heaven upon death? Were early Christians militaristic? What about tradition? This animation addresses those issues and more.

I can state for a fact that Jesus would NOT choose any of the Churches of God considering the pathetic state they are all in, especially Bob Thiel's nightmare of false Christianity.

 

Things You Never Hear A Church of God Leader/Minister Say: Discover Jesus, Encounter Jesus, Celebrate Jesus, Proclaim Jesus

 

The above snapshot is from a local church in South Pasadena, CA.

Can you imagine a Church of God ever doing such a thing? Instead, it hides behind closed doors while belching doom and gloom to a negligible part of the world around them. 99.99% of the world has no idea who or what a Church of God is anymore.

This church is in South Pasadena, CA, a small town of 26,000, where almost 1/2 of the population is registered as members at the church with at least 3,500 of those attending church services each week. Most COG's nowadays are lucky to have 30-40 people present on a Saturday or a couple hundred at a Feast site. 

Each week this church provides food for over 300+ homeless or needy families in the area. How many Churches of God feed the needy in their areas? Sure, one or two now collect food and clothing for homeless shelters or food banks at a couple Feast sites, but as soon as they leave the city, where the local population has been watching them dump tons of money for 8 days, they go home and do nothing.

Jesus is rarely talked about but church members know all about the Mystery of the Ages, Herbert Armstrong, the law, which kind of meat is ok to eat, and what time sundown is. Ask most of them what the New Covenant is about and you will get a blank stare. They will tell you what they think it is NOT about, though.

When have you ever heard a Church of God member being extolled to live as a missionary disciple? 

When have you ever heard of a COG encouraging members to build a personal relationship with Jesus? Church members are usually only encouraged to shine the light inwardly to other church members.

When has a COG member been extolled to discover their faith relies entirely upon Jesus and not some book or booklet written by Herbert Armstrong or some self-appointed prophet or even on the law?

Incidentally, this is a local Catholic Church, so-called Christians as Bob Thiel and Armstrongism calls them.

Jon Brisby Warns Elderly Followers To Not Worship Superheroes Because One Day They Will Be One!

 

From a COGE source:

In the MR-COGE - Mentally Retarded Church of God Eternal, Jon Brisby digs deep into the lint of his spiritually empty pockets and comes up with a doozy of a sermon about not worshipping superheroes (Beware Superheroes) to present to his elderly congregation. I guess he thinks his aged congregants are sneaking those evil comic books into their nursing homes and worshipping images of Batman. Maybe it would be better for those old people to send that comic book money in to the church that way Jon can afford to continue his perpetual world tour which produces zero results.

Jon goes on to tell his mentally retarded congregation that they will one day be super heroes! You know... God as God is!

It appears Jon Brisby is becoming a serious contender in the COG Leader Challenge of producing the wackiest, time wasting sermons, which distract their followers from blowing the dust off their Bibles and learning about the Gospel.

 

Why We will not be “God as God is God” – Part 1

 

Why We will not be “God as God is God” – Part 1

Against the Armstrongist Doctrine of Becoming God

By Anton

“God then purposed to reproduce himself, through humans, made in his image and likeness…” - Herbert W. Armstrong, Mystery of the Ages, p. 94, 1985. 

“It cannot be repeated too often:  We were born for the express purpose of literally becoming equal with the creator of the universe — members in the same eternally ruling God Family-Kingdom. But what will we be like?  Like God!  Exactly! Exactly like God!”  - Robert L. Kuhn, “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

“Thus said the Lord, The King of Israel, their Redeemer, the Lord of Hosts, I am the first and the last, and there is no God but me…”  -  Isaiah 44:6, Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition.  

In orthodox Christianity, there are doctrines of Deification, Sanctification or Theosis. All refer to a process of humans partaking of the divine nature. None lead to the idea that humans will become “God as God is God” which is an expression that has been used by some Armstrongist leaders. Herbert W. Armstrong’s words, short and simple, capture the concept of God-as-God-is-God: “God is reproducing himself.” This language means that resurrected humans will not be just similar to God but will be of the same category as God – in a literal sense equal to God in every existential respect. In Armstrongist literature, this concept was further explained in some detail by Robert L. Kuhn, quoted above, who wrote on the topic of how man is destined to become equal with God. 

 
To provide context, it is informative that Armstrongists are willing to assert human equality with God but describe Jesus, who is explicitly stated in scripture to be equal with God (Philippians 2:6), often in terms of being subordinate to God. This may be a leftover from the general Arianist view of 19th Century Adventism. Kuhn supports equality but qualifies it. Kuhn is careful to point out that though resurrected humans will become “qualitatively equal” to God, that is, they will have the same existential qualities as God such as being self-existent, resurrected humans will not be “quantitatively equal” to God, that is, God will always be greater in authority, power and intelligence. Qualitative equality, as Kuhn seems to define it, is arguably centered on ontology; whereas, quantitative equality centers on economy. Ontology refers to God’s unchanging existential nature while economy refers to roles, responsibilities, purposes and actions.

We can only assume that Kuhn’s view was also HWA’s view since Kuhn’s statement of the doctrine appeared in print in a leading magazine coming from the Armstrongist press. And what the doctrine states, in theological terminology, is that Armstrongists do not really believe in an unqualified version of the statement “God as God is God.” Rather, Armstrongists believe that resurrected humans will one day be equal to God in ontology but not economy. I believe that the Biblical view is at odds with the Armstrongist view – resurrected humans will be equal to God neither in ontology nor economy. Resurrected humans may participate to a degree in the divine economy through having God delegate activities to his children but resurrected humans will not be equal to God in ontology. This is the topic of this essay.

Note: This essay analyzes the doctrine of becoming God as presented in Classical Armstrongism. Kuhn published in the Seventies.  I do not know how denominations derived from the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) now state this doctrine. Also, the commonly used Christian terms “ontology” and “economy”, in the theological sense, are nowhere used in Armstrongist literature that I can find. 

Section I:  Ontological Differences between God and Resurrected Humans

Ontology refers to God’s eternal existential nature and essence. I believe this roughly corresponds to Kuhn’s concept of being “qualitatively” like God (See reference to Kuhn article at end for a more detailed exposition of his ideas). The question we seek to resolve is whether resurrected humans are ontologically the same as God. If resurrected humans are different from God ontologically, then the God-as-is-God trope fails. Below are some points at issue:

 

God does not grow but resurrected humans will: Back years ago, a member of the WCG mentioned how amazing it would be to be resurrected and instantly have the mind of God and to know what God knows. I do not recall if it was a minister or lay member, but it is a mistaken notion that no doubt originated in the God-as-God-is-God idea. Isaiah 65:17-18 states, “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create…”. The scope of this passage is clearly prophetic and refers to the time after the resurrection. And God states that he will do the creating and we will rejoice. And this will be an eternal process. This means he will have the knowledge, capabilities and wisdom to create and we will not. God is absolute. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He says, “I am that I am.” This is the language of absoluteness. He will create and we will learn about his creation and how to rejoice in what he creates. He has no need to learn because he made everything, including humans. But resurrected human beings will continue to learn throughout eternity. He will not grow. Being absolute is a binary condition – either you are or you aren’t. There is no gradation. God does not become today twice as absolute as he was yesterday. God will not grow but resurrected humans will. And in this respect, we will be ontologically unlike God.

God alone creates: HWA many times used the analogy of unfinished furniture to illustrate a possible way in which resurrected humans might be given the responsibility of putting the finishing touches on the Cosmos. Terraforming planets, however, is not creation but fabrication – using existing materials and sources. God creates ex nihilo (Hebrews 11:3). There is no support for the idea that resurrected humans might create ex nihilo in scripture.

God states in Isaiah 65:17-18, "But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create”. God creates and we rejoice. Forever. If resurrected humans were going to be "God as God is God", would resurrected humans not be rejoicing in those things that they themselves would create? And if resurrected humans are not creators, they are lacking a fundamental ontological quality that identifies God and Godhood.

God does not have a bodily existence: God is spirit and is not restricted by form. If God had a form as a part his eternal essence, the form would have extension into multi-dimensional space or some equivalent to space. Without this extension, the concept of form does not exist. If God’s form were eternal, so would be the dimensions that his form would occupy. This means that the containing dimensions, phenomena external to God, were not created by God but are uncreated. Then God would not be the creator of all things and John 1:3 would be violated.

And a more subtle point is that if there were eternal uncreated dimensions, they would themselves be Divine and represent a kind of deity in addition to God.The most extensive treatment of the concept of an embodied existence is given in 1 Corinthians 15. If God had a body, the concept could be nicely incorporated into this text. Instead, in 1 Corinthians 15:49, Christians are told that they will bear the image (eikon) of the man of heaven, from context (vv. 45-47) a reference to Jesus who acquired a body as an aspect of his ontology in the Incarnation. We will be similar to Jesus who has a body, being fully man and fully God, not like God the Father who does not.

Humans will experience a bodily resurrection. I Corinthians 15 can be interpreted in no other way. This means that resurrected humans will have locality in space and must travel distance to be at another location. And the traveling of the distance will require time. It may be that resurrected humans will have a much different relationship with time than flesh and blood humans. Perhaps, resurrected humans can transit the cosmos in an instant, but the travel still requires an instant of time. Near the time of the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus, the disciples saw Jesus ascend in his resurrection body. The language of Acts 1:6-11 expresses visibility, time and distance. If resurrected humans have bodies in the spacetime context and God has no body, resurrected humans will be ontologically different from God.

God does not experience time as we do: God created time. Time is a property of the physical universe. It responds to gravity, for instance. As gravity increases, time slows down. If you were in a starship and you approached a black hole, time would slow down because of the increase in gravity. As the starship approached the Schwarzschild radius, time would nearly stop. Time back on planet earth would continue to flow at the same rate. Since God created time, God in his essence is, therefore, timeless. This is not just an imaginary condition. Photons do not experience time as they travel through the cosmos. Further, a photon will experience all the locations along its path of travel through the cosmos at the same time. (Of course, photons are not beings that can experience. Pretend that you are an infinitesimally small, bodyless nano-being, riding on the photon racing along at the speed of light. That is the experience the nano-being version of you would have.)

We can only conjecture on God’s timeless state. Some believe that he does not experience a sequence of moments. There is some traction to this view. If God experiences time as a sequence of moments and has a past, present and future, then he has had an eternal past. This means that it doesn’t make sense that he would ever reach the present that we are experiencing. He would be eternally imprisoned in the infinite time that forms his past and is still passing through that infinite span of time to try to get to the present. That is the paradoxical way that an infinite series of consecutive moments works. And that is the weakness of the sequence of time argument – it leads to Reductio ad Absurdum. Others believe that God does have logical but not physical sequencing in his thoughts and activities. The logical antecedent must precede the logical consequent, for instance. Further, for us time is an organizing principle. The most I can say about that is to state the apophatic principle that God is not chaotic or confused. How he organizes without time, I don’t know.

Humans, on the other hand, now experience and will experience, in the resurrected life, time as a sequence of moments. At the Ascension in Acts 1:6-11, Jesus in his resurrection body experienced motion, time and distance as the disciples watched him ascend. This is data that must be used in the formation of our conclusions. And the conclusion is that God experiences time differently than we will even in our resurrected state, therefore, resurrected humans are ontologically different from God with regard to the fundamental relationship to time.

Fermilab, “Do Photons Really Experience Time?”:

Kuhn, Robert L.  “What it Means to be – Equal with God”, Tomorrow’s World Magazine, April 1971.

 

Sproul, R.C. “What’s the Difference Between the Ontological and Economic Trinity?”

 

(To Be Continued)