Note: While I may or may not agree with many of the things said below I am making good on my offer for LCG members to have a space to share their concerns. LCG members/former members now make up a significant percentage of the readership here. We have allowed them space to share their concerns and disappointments in the leadership and direction of the church.
From a Living Church of God member: ...
I am a Living Church of God member who would like anonymously to post a couple of articles that I think many of your readers might find interesting because they are entirely based in Scripture and because they are completely contrary to what was pounded into church members for decades. I think they help explain some of why the church(es) proclaim what is in the Bible but at the same time treat people like dirt.
Is the Living Church of God the fulfillment
of the Sardis
church description?
The Worldwide Church of God claimed to be the fulfillment of the
Revelation 3 description of the faithful church era, so does every one of the
hundreds of offshoots from that church.
Have any of them actually taken the time to compare themselves to what
the actual Scriptures actually say?
Let's take a look at what the actual Scriptures actually say and compare
them to the actual facts.
Revelation 3:1 states: "And to the angel of the church in
Sardis write, 'These things says He who has the seven Spirits of God and the
seven stars: " I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive,
but you are dead."
Here we have a very specific clue - the name. In sermon #964, Gerald Weston mentions that
the originally, Mr. Meredith had wanted to incorporate under the name
"Church of the Living God", however that was unavailable for some
reason, and so the name was chosen as "Living Church of God". Those are two entirely different
connotations, and the one fits precisely with the name that is
"alive" in Rev. 3:1. Mr.
Armstrong claimed that the Church of God, Seventh Day was the Sardis church
era, however, that is simply not a name that is "alive" in the
same way that Living Church of God IS a name that is alive. The facts and the Scripture match.
Verse 2 of Rev. 3 gives a warning that there are problems in the
church that are not being fixed. Verse 3
gives a description of what is wrong, "Remember how you have received and
heard; hold fast and repent...."
Here we see what the problem is: the era has forgotten how it heard and
received and does not repent.
How does a person received the truth? A person must be humble and teachable, as
Christ illustrated by using the example of a little child (Matt. 18:2-4, Mark
9:37, Luke 9:48). When the crowd heard
Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost they realized they had sinned and were
given the instruction to repent (Acts 2:37-38), and they did. Receiving the truth involves being humble and
teachable, and that doesn't only apply to someone "new in the faith",
but to everyone at all times. Even the
apostles, after the coming of the Holy Spirit sinned (Gal 2:11-13) and had
things they needed to learn (Phil. 4:11-12).
To receive the truth it is required to repent, and repentance
will not be accepted without also forgiving others (Matt. 6:14-15). Repentance without forgiveness is of zero
value (Matt 18:21-35). I fear for the
ministers who have issued unfair punishments to church members (James
2:13). While I understand that there are
times when discipline must be administered, it must be done in accordance with
the Scriptures (Matt. 18:15-17) and it must be for Scriptural reasons or
otherwise established clear rules, not simply some unexplainable cause. There also must be no partiality involved
(Deut. 1:17, 16:19, James 2:1-9).
Unfortunately, the Living Church of God falls very short in these
areas. If you have been treated badly by
the Living Church of God and read the open letter from the Scarborough's, you
probably read a playbook of the way you were treated as well - accused and then
shutdown and cut off in spite of clear evidence of innocence or underlying
circumstances. While no one is perfect,
the harshness often dealt out is often in far disproportion to the alleged
infraction, and no amount of apology is ever accepted or even acknowledged, it
is simply the opinion of the minister that reigns supreme. In Mr. Meredith's live webcast on Dec. 24,
2016, he stated that if someone in church has a problem and they bring it to
the leadership that they will listen.
But here is what most often actually happens: If someone has an issue
with a minister and they bring the problem to the church leadership, they will
initially listen to the person, then ask the minister in question what his
version is, and then side with the minister.
If there are further attempts by the individuals to be heard they will
be ignored or kicked out. The clear
evidence, facts of the matter, multiple witnesses, or Scripture become
completely irrelevant, all that the church leadership seems to care about is
their authority being upheld. I'm not
just basing this on the Scarborough's letter, I know it from seeing others get
treated the same way. I knew one individual
who asked repeatedly why they were being punished and tried to apologize for
everything they could think of only to have their apology turned around and
used as "evidence" against them.
I knew another individual who was issued a punishment and when they
asked the HQ minister sent to review the case why they were being punished, he
simply said he didn't know - but that didn't stop him from enforcing the
punishment (get this: he flew all the way from Living Church HQ to review a
case, and didn't know why the person was being punished). The lack of forgiveness and lack of
repentance certainly fits with the description of Rev. 3:3.
Pointing out Scripture to a minister is also treading on very
thin ice. I'm not talking about an
obscure verse somewhere or vague prophecy, I'm talking about multiple verses
that essentially back up common sense.
Things such as getting all the facts before judging a matter (Deut.
13:14,17:4, 6, 19:15-18, Matt. 18:15-17, I Tim. 5:19) not listening to here-say
or gossip, and so on. If a minister is
transgressing in these areas, to point it out is to ask for retribution,
whereas it should be the opposite (Pro. 9:8, 15:31, 17:10), the ministry should
be especially glad to adhere closely to Scriptural guidance. This know-it-all attitude is the opposite of
how a person receives and hears the truth and is a fulfillment of Rev.
3:3. The facts and the Scripture match.
Concerning the "works" that are mentioned. The Living Church of God acts as if the only
definition of the word "work" is preaching the gospel and that doing
so somehow gives a pass to any other wrongdoing that is going on. That is simply not the case,
"works" are what a person does (Gal. 3:19-21, James 2:14). Preaching the gospel to the world is a base
requirement of God's church (Mark 16:15, I Cor. 9:16), it does not earn extra
credit or cover for sins (Pro. 10:12, Luke 17:10, I Pet. 4:8).
Continuing on in verse 3 of Rev. 3, "...Therefore if you
will not watch,..." Watch what,
world news? Is that what it is talking
about? No, refer back to verse 2, it is
talking about watching and strengthening the qualities that are dying. It's about watching the self and personally
overcoming, repenting, and so on. Seeing
the exact world actors and timing that are due to fulfill prophetic events is
worthless without a foundation of Godly love (I Cor. 13:2), which is based on
following His law (John 14:15, 15:10, I John 2:4, 5:2-3).
The penalty for "not watching" is, "...I will come
upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I come upon
you." As is made clear in many
Bible prophecy areas and is examined in many church of God books on the
subject, there are many signs that precede Christ's return, years of them, in
fact. Christ isn't going to sneak back
and surprise people. But Christ
returning is not the only way that He can "come upon" a person, as is
made clear in the Ezekiel warning (Ezek. 3:18-21). If a person dies before Christ's return, then
Christ has essentially come as far as that person is concerned. Also, considering that there are many signs
prior to Christ's return, and yet He indicates that He will sneak up on this
church era, it seems that this church era will not be in existence at His
return. There have been many churches of
God over the centuries that have flourished and then vanished, the Scripture
seems to indicate that the Sardis era, exemplified by the Living Church of God,
will be no different.
Rev. 3:4 states, "You have a few names even in Sardis who
have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they
are worthy." This statement should
stand as a very stark warning for the church, note that it is not the
"many" who have not defiled their garments, but the
"few". The church leadership
who thinks they have a place in the kingdom assured and yet go around
oppressing the members had better think again.
Hophni and Phineas and the Pharisees all held positions of leadership as
well and they certainly didn't gain automatic admission into the kingdom
because of it (I Cor. 10:12). And
members who aren't repentant, forgiving, and actively making changes in their
lives to better get along with others and serve God had better beware also.
Rev. 3:5 states, "He who overcomes shall be clothed in white
garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will
confess his name before My Father and before His angels." This verse tells the seriousness of not
overcoming - he who does not overcome will not be clothed in
white and will be blotted out from the Book of Life. This is how serious it is to be humble,
teachable, repentant, and forgiving.
Ceasing from those things will lead to loss of salvation.
The conclusion in Rev. 3:6 says, "He who has an ear, let him
hear what the Spirit says to the churches." The admonition is to look at what is said to
all the churches, not just the ones you think apply to you.
It is my hope that the Living Church of God leadership will read
this and cease from the harshness and partiality that is so rampant. If the Living Church leadership doesn't want
their church described as a "minister's club", then stop making it
into one. It is my prayer that the
Scripture will be followed, not just taught.
It would be nice to see some openness and honesty for a change.
Anonymous
Scriptural evidence of why Worldwide Church of God
was not the Philadelphian era of the church.
The Worldwide Church of God was measurably the largest and most influential church of God in the history of the churches of God. With mailing lists of some 8 million and church attendance in the hundreds of thousands, the size of the church dwarfed any previous church of God by magnitudes. With the invention of radio and television, the preaching of the gospel went out in ways previously unimaginable to people around the world. The economies of scale allowed printed magazines to be distributed widely. This ability to preach the gospel in such a dramatic manner left little doubt to Mr. Armstrong about which church era he was head of - obviously, he had the "open door" of Rev. 3:8, and therefore simply must be the manifestation of the Philadelphian era. Now that we have the advantage of being able to look back in time, does that assertion still hold true?
Mr. Armstrong had identified the Church of God, Seventh Day as being the "Sardis Era", however, the name certainly doesn't fit the description. His reasoning was that since they had lost much of the truth and did not have a zeal to preach the gospel, that they were figuratively a "dead" church. Also, since Worldwide was "obviously" the Philadelphian era, this had to be the case. But does it fit with history and Scripture? If you read the books on church of God history, you will find a repeated pattern which goes something like this: Revival - Growth - Apostasy - Collapse. Simply skim through the book by Mr. Ogwyn on the subject and you will find this over and over again, especially during the vast span of time identified as the "Thyatira era". Although Mr. Armstrong could not know it at the time, the church he raised up would follow that exact same pattern.
If you have read the article comparing the Living Church of God to the description in Revelation 3 of the Sardis church, you will have some of the premise and additional evidence of Worldwide not being Philadelphian due to time sequence.
So let's look at the actual Scriptures and the actual facts starting in Rev. 3:7:
"And to the angel of this church in Philidelphia write; These things says He who is Holy, He who is true, He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens:"
In sermon number 974, Mr. Gerald Weston notes correctly that this verse is a description of Christ (not the church) and that it is a quotation from Isaiah 22:22. He also repeats Mr. Rod Meredith's frequent assertion that ""David" means government". Is that what this Scripture is saying? The passage in Isaiah 22:15-23 refers to someone who has a key to king Davids house, they have control over who is allowed to enter. This in no way is speaking about a type of governmental structure as has been frequently asserted, the context simply does not support it. The description is of Christ as having the key, it is Him who has control over who enters the King's house and who doesn't.
Rev. 3:8 "I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name."
First of all, "works" are simply what a person does, it does not refer to any one specific thing such as preaching the gospel (Gen. 2:2-3, I Cor. 3:13-15, II Thess 3:8, Titus 2:7). Christ is simply saying He knows what this era is doing.
Mr. Armstrong read this verse and referenced the other places in the Bible where a "door" is used to mean an opening to preach the gospel (I Cor. 16:9, II Cor. 2:12, Col. 4:3) and concluded that this meant that the Philadelphian era would have a large opening to preach the gospel. This interpretation combined with the overwhelming magnitude of the preaching of the gospel by Worldwide led to his "obvious" conclusion. But is that conclusion correct? All of Worldwide and all the offshoots claims of "Philadelphianess" depend on the correct meaning of the "open door" in this verse.
Of primary importance, let's consider the context of this statement about the "open door". The Greek word translated "door" appears 39 times in the New Testament, but only three of them clearly allude to preaching the gospel. The previous verse was describing Christ as having the power to open or close an entrance and here we see a door open to this group of people. Considering that there is no criticism to this group of people, it is a fitting reward that they would be allowed into God's house. To paraphrase the two verses in regards the door: "7 Christ has the key to the house 8 and He has opened the door to you." Where in the two verses is there anything that alludes to the "open door" as pertaining to the gospel? It isn't there any more than there is Christmas is in Matthew 2! The word "door" also appears in verse 20, but no one contends that it is referring to preaching the gospel due to context. Well, the context of verses 7-8 doesn't support it either. The claims of Mr. Meredith that the Living Church of God is the "Philadelphian remnant" rest entirely on the "open door" of verse 8 having to do with the preaching of the gospel, but the context clearly does not support it! (Furthermore, where in the Scripture is there any mention of a "Philadelphian remnant"?)
I am not saying that preaching the gospel is not the duty of a Christian church, it certainly is, but I am saying that using that as the defining characteristic of the Philadelphian era does not fit with the context of the Scripture. Both Worldwide and Living church have blasted other churches for taking Scriptures out of context, but isn't that really what has happened here? The concept of the preaching of the gospel as defining the Philadelphian church has been a constant for decades, but how does the Scriptural reference back that up? I know many will simply insist on that definition "because Mr. Armstrong said so" and it is in keeping with church tradition, however, what did Christ say about traditions that were not according to the Scripture (Matt. 15:3-6, 9, Mark 7:8-9, Col. 2:8)? He was not impressed. This is very important, look at what the words of Scripture actually say!
Continuing along in verse 8, the description continues that this church era has kept Christ's word and did not deny His name. Did Worldwide do that? Did it uphold the Bible and keep to it's teachings? Of course not, it dropped the teachings and went right into protestantism. Even when Mr. Armstrong was alive there were many leaders who broke away and took members with them right into heresy. Corruption grew up frequently that he had to deal with, he even had to put his own son out of the church. Before his death the seeds had already been planted that would attempt to wipe away everything he had taught within just a few years after his death. It is hard to look at all that and describe it as a church that held fast to the Scripture, in fact, it is impossible.
Verse 9 can only be fulfilled after Christ's return. Verse 10 indicates that this church era will be protected from the "hour of trial" which is assumed to be the great tribulation, although that term isn't found elsewhere in the Bible. If that assumption is correct, then this church era must exist before and during that time. There is nothing here about it existing in fullness and then dwindling to a remnant for which this part is fulfilled. If protection is due to being already in the grave, then there is nothing special about this church era's protection, as the majority of Christians are already in the grave. The reward of protection is due to persevering, but it is not specific in exactly what. Did Worldwide church persevere? It no longer even exists!
In verse 11 Christ says He is coming quickly and to hold on to the crown that is given. Although "quick" to us and "quick" to God are different things, Christ does say He is coming quickly to this era, which further indicates its existence at His return. Worldwide church no longer exists, and many of those who were associated with it at its beginning are no longer alive.
So since Worldwide was not the Philadelphian era, what was it? Well if the eras are sequential and Living church is Sardis (see the other article for that), then let's look at the description of Thyatira and see if it matches.
As with all the eras, the first line part describes some attribute of Christ. Verse 19 starts the description of the church:
:19 I know your works, love, service, faith, and your patience [perseverance]; and as for your works, the last are more than the first.
Here there are several positive traits listed and then one that is very interesting - that the last works are more than the first. When it comes to churches of God through history to the present, there isn't any that surpass Worldwide in size, influence, or recognition. This church very clearly had far more "works" than any of the others, printing more literature, and using means and methods not even imagined in the previous centuries. Was Worldwide the end of the Thyatira era? They certainly had more works than any before them: the description fits. They also, more so early on than later, had an approach of love, service, and faith. When Mr. Armstrong "put the church back on track", those attributes were not really restored to what they had been before.
20 Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.
The Jezebel of the Bible was a huge promoter of pagan religion, and in this context it seems that the "sexual immorality" mentioned probably has to do with dabbling in false religious ideas. Did some in the leadership of Worldwide church ever dabble in false christianity? During the church wide fast and live broadcast from Living church HQ Mr. Weston mentioned that there were ministers in Worldwide who quietly kept Christmas. The various "theology projects" that took place also had leanings toward false religious practice.
And what is "eating things sacrificed to idols"? That is to take something that is fine of and by itself, but has been tainted by its use in pagan practice (Acts 15:29, I Cor. 10:28). A very clear example of this is the use of Masonic lodges to hold church services in, which was extremely prevalent during the time of Worldwide. The Masonic practices are clearly rooted in paganism and their buildings always contain symbols and idols, and yet that is where Holy Days were kept, in the midst of rooms containing idols! Clearly, this description fits.
Verse 21 indicates that the church was given time to repent and didn't. This brings to mind the time in the '70s when Mr. Armstrong "put the church back on track". It was not "back on track" as was plainly evidenced over the next decades. The church as a whole did not repent.
Verse 22 indicates that the church era and those associated with it will be in "great tribulation", which means that the church era will be around at that time. How is indicated in verse 23 which indicates that this church era produces "children". Just as the great false church produces children (Rev. 17:5), so does the Thyatira era of God's church, and with hundreds of churches springing from the collapse of Worldwide, this fits the description. This may also tie in with Rev. 12:17 as being among the ones that Satan is allowed to pursue.
Verse 24 describes there being no "other burden" being placed on those who do not have the false doctrine. It appears that the main trial of this era of the church is to resist the pull of false doctrine. Did Worldwide resist the pull of false doctrine? Pretty clearly, it didn't, not at it's demise, and not during its span.
The balance of the passage gives a list of rewards to the over-comers and an admonishment to hold fast, as with all the eras. The easily obtainable facts and the clear portions of Scripture seem to line up pointing to Worldwide as not being the Philadelphian era but the last hurrah of the Thyatira era. Mr. Armstrong could not have known at the time what the perspective would be thirty or so years after his death, but now the situation is very apparent. This pretty well explains the corruption and mistreatment that so many were subjected to over the course of Worldwide's existence and the churches that sprang from it. Far from being the era which was given no reproach, it was an era mixed with corruption, as so many readers of this website witnessed with their own eyes.
I am sorry for all of the people who were treated disdainfully by individuals who claimed to represent God. Their conduct is blasphemous even more if they are among the leadership. Those who think that being in "the right church" and "preaching the gospel" remove any obligation to treat people with decency have completely missed the main point of God's way of life that they claim to profess. They way that people are treated like garbage and thrown out without a second thought is an absolute disgrace, and the complete opposite of what God's word clearly spells out.
Anonymous
