Focused Upon Abraham While Jesus Is Shoved To The Shadows

Armstrongism has an unusual fascination with the past. Its ministers seem perpetually occupied with Abraham, Moses, David, Elijah, and the prophets, presenting these Old Testament figures as the ultimate examples of faith and obedience. Yet one has to wonder why Jesus Christ and the men and women who followed Him under the New Covenant so often receive comparatively little attention. Crackpot Bob's latest presentation on having the faith of Abraham provides another perfect example of this curious religious backwardness.

There is nothing wrong with recognizing Abraham's faith. He believed God, trusted His promises, and demonstrated his convictions through his actions. Scripture itself commends him. But Crackpot Bob's discussion eventually moves from Abraham's example into the familiar Armstrongist territory of Sabbath keeping, Holy Days, tithing, rejecting Christmas, and supporting the organization's religious mission. Suddenly, Abraham's faith becomes another convenient vehicle for promoting the same old Armstrongist checklist. Apparently, even a discussion about Abraham cannot escape becoming a fundraising and religious-obligation opportunity!

The problem is that Abraham lived before the establishment of the New Covenant. Christians are not called to recreate ancient Israel's religious arrangements but to follow Jesus Christ. Abraham was an important servant of God, but he was not the Messiah, the head of the church, or the mediator of the New Covenant. Those distinctions belong to Jesus, and perhaps Armstrongism should occasionally remember that Christianity revolves around Him.

Jesus taught His followers to love their neighbors, forgive their enemies, practice mercy, serve others, and reject religious hypocrisy. In Matthew 23, He condemned religious leaders who placed burdens upon others while neglecting justice, mercy, and faithfulness. In John 13, He demonstrated servant leadership by washing His disciples' feet. In John 15, He commanded them to love one another as He had loved them. Yet these teachings about humility, compassion, and genuine Christian character often seem to take a back seat to endless discussions about religious observances and organizational loyalty.

And where are the New Testament heroes? What about Stephen, who remained faithful under persecution? Paul, who endured imprisonment and hardship for preaching Christ? Peter, who boldly proclaimed the Savior he had once denied? What about Mary Magdalene, Priscilla, Phoebe, and Lydia, whose devotion and service helped shape the early Christian community? Hebrews 11 celebrates Old Testament examples of faith, but Hebrews 12:2 directs believers to look unto Jesus, the author and finisher of their faith. Apparently, the author of Hebrews understood something that Armstrongism repeatedly struggles to appreciate: the Old Testament examples point beyond themselves to Christ.

The deeper problem is that Armstrongism frequently uses these Old Testament figures to justify importing Old Covenant requirements into Christianity. But Paul's discussion of Abraham in Romans 4 makes precisely the point that righteousness was credited through faith, not earned through religious performance. Abraham was counted righteous before circumcision, a distinction Paul deliberately emphasizes. Ephesians 2:8-10 likewise teaches that salvation is by grace through faith, not works, while making clear that believers are created in Christ for good works. Good works are the fruit of God's grace, not a payment made to secure salvation.

The New Covenant does not eliminate obedience; it places Christian obedience within a relationship centered on Jesus Christ. Hebrews 8:13 speaks plainly about the first covenant becoming obsolete. Yet Armstrongism seems determined to keep dragging Christians backward, recycling Old Covenant practices while insisting that it is restoring authentic Christianity.

Perhaps this explains the constant fascination with Abraham, Moses, and Elijah. Their stories can be conveniently employed to reinforce lawkeeping, religious authority, institutional loyalty, and the familiar Armstrongist prophetic narrative. The New Testament, however, presents a far more challenging standard. Jesus condemned religious hypocrisy, Paul confronted attempts to place Gentile Christians under the Mosaic law, and Galatians warned believers against returning to bondage. Christianity is about transformation through Christ, not simply maintaining an inventory of religious regulations.

Just to be clear, there is nothing wrong with having the faith of Abraham. The real question is why Armstrongism spends so much time looking backward when Christians have been given the teachings, example, sacrifice, and faithfulness of men and women in the New Testament and in church history. Abraham looked forward to God's promises, but Christians have been given their fulfillment in Christ.

Abraham was a man of faith, Moses was a servant of God, David was a king, and Elijah was a prophet. But none of them died for humanity's sins, established the New Covenant, or rose from the dead to become the head of the church. That distinction belongs exclusively to Jesus Christ.

Perhaps Armstrongism should spend less time looking for Abraham and considerably more time actually following Jesus. Christianity has moved beyond Genesis. It is about time Armstrongism caught up.

Armstrongism's Strange Bedfellows: Continually Seeking Credibility From People Outside Its Own Movement

There has always been something remarkably contradictory about Armstrongism. For decades, its leaders have proclaimed that Herbert W. Armstrong restored lost biblical truths, that their particular organization represents God's true Church, and that mainstream Christianity has been deceived. Yet, despite all those claims of possessing exclusive truth, Armstrongism has developed an almost embarrassing fascination with outside personalities, religious commentators, prophetic sensationalists, and organizations that have little or nothing to do with the Church of God movement.

Apparently, possessing the supposedly restored truth isn't quite enough. Armstrongism must continually seek out credibility from people outside its own movement.

Consider Mark Armstrong, United Church of God, Living Church of God, and Bob Thiel's fascination with WorldNetDaily (WND), its personalities and contributors, individuals such as Joe Kovacs, Jonathan Cahn and his The Harbinger phenomenon, and various other religious and political commentators whose teachings and prophetic interpretations appeal to Armstrongite audiences. These personalities become useful allies whenever they reinforce the movement's worldview, particularly its obsession with America's supposed prophetic destiny, national judgment, biblical numerology, end-time catastrophes, and the impending collapse of civilization.

The irony is extraordinary. Armstrongism condemns mainstream Christianity for allegedly abandoning biblical truth, yet readily embraces outside voices when those voices happen to echo its own theological prejudices. Suddenly, people who would otherwise have little connection to the Church of God movement become valuable sources of prophetic insight and religious validation.

But why should a Christian embrace someone's teaching simply because it reinforces what he already believes?

The Harbinger and the fascination with prophetic sensationalism

Jonathan Cahn's The Harbinger became particularly attractive to audiences already conditioned to interpret contemporary American events through an Old Testament prophetic framework. Its central premise draws parallels between ancient Israel's judgment and the circumstances of modern America. 

That approach should immediately raise questions for anyone who understands the distinction between the Old and New Covenants. God's covenant relationship with ancient Israel was unique. America is not ancient Israel, nor does the United States occupy Israel's covenant position simply because a religious commentator discovers similarities between contemporary events and passages in Isaiah.

The New Testament does not authorize Christians to manufacture national prophecies by transferring Israel's covenant warnings to modern political circumstances.

Yet this is precisely the sort of material that appeals to Armstrongism. Having spent decades teaching that biblical prophecy revolves around modern national identities, national punishment, and geopolitical speculation, Armstrongite audiences naturally gravitate toward anyone who supplies another supposed confirmation of their prophetic expectations.

The problem isn't merely that such interpretations may be questionable. It is that they encourage Christians to look for hidden messages, prophetic patterns, and mysterious warnings rather than concentrating on the finished work of Jesus Christ and the responsibilities of living under the New Covenant.

The Berean Call itself published criticism of The Harbinger, questioning its handling of Scripture and its application of Israel's covenant warnings to America. The controversy surrounding WND's promotion of Cahn demonstrates just how easily religious personalities and organizations become entangled in competing claims of prophetic authority.

The WND problem: Borrowing credibility from questionable religious alliances

WND and its associated personalities have also provided a convenient platform for religious ideas that appeal to Armstrongite thinking. When an organization promotes a personality or interpretation that supports their existing worldview, many Armstrongites seem perfectly willing to overlook doctrinal differences they would otherwise condemn.

This creates a peculiar double standard. A mainstream Christian teacher can be dismissed as deceived because he disagrees with Armstrongism, while an outside commentator can be enthusiastically embraced because he happens to promote a theory about national judgment, biblical prophecy, or the end of the age.

That is not biblical discernment. It is confirmation bias dressed up in Armstrongite hypocrisy.

A Christian's responsibility is not to find personalities who reinforce his preferred prophetic narrative. It is to examine every teaching in light of Scripture, including teachings coming from people he admires.

Paul's warning in Colossians 2:8 remains particularly relevant: believers must beware of being taken captive through human philosophy and traditions rather than remaining rooted in Christ.

The deeper problem: Armstrongism never really left the Old Covenant

Here is where the entire discussion becomes considerably more important.

Armstrongism's attraction to these outside personalities is not accidental. It grows out of a theological system that continually returns believers to an Old Covenant framework. Its obsession with national identities, physical blessings and curses, Sabbath enforcement, ceremonial observances, prophetic calculations, and national punishment creates an environment in which modern-day prophetic interpreters become especially appealing.

The movement may speak frequently about Christ, but its theological instincts repeatedly direct attention elsewhere: to Herbert Armstrong, organizational authorities, prophetic personalities, Old Testament national identities, and the latest supposedly significant world event.

The New Covenant, however, establishes something fundamentally different.

Jesus Christ is not merely another personality in a succession of religious authorities. He is the fulfillment of God's promises and the mediator of a better covenant (Hebrews 8:6). The believer's standing before God is not determined by attachment to a religious organization, acceptance of a modern prophet's interpretations, or participation in somebody's prophetic timetable.

The New Testament repeatedly directs believers toward Christ, not toward an endless succession of religious personalities claiming special insight.

Hebrews 1:1-2 establishes the significance of God's revelation through His Son. Colossians 2:16-17 explains that the Old Covenant shadows find their fulfillment in Christ. Galatians 3:24-25 explains that believers are no longer under the former arrangement as their governing covenant authority.

These passages should be enough to make any New Covenant Christian cautious about religious movements that continually attempt to resurrect the authority and obligations of the former covenant.

Why would a New Covenant Christian follow these personalities?

A Christian is certainly free to read books, examine commentary, listen to teachers, and consider different perspectives. Nobody should be expected to accept every statement made by a particular ministry or denomination. But there is an enormous difference between examining someone's material and treating that person as a trusted spiritual authority.

A New Covenant Christian does not need WND, Jonathan Cahn, Kovacs, Herbert Armstrong, Mark Armstrong, Bob Thiel, or any other religious personality to explain why Christ is sufficient. Nor does he need somebody's interpretation of America's political circumstances to establish his relationship with God.

The standard is Scripture, understood through the revelation of Jesus Christ and the New Covenant.

That means rejecting sensationalist prophecy when it goes beyond what Scripture actually teaches, questioning interpretations that transfer Israel's covenant promises and judgments indiscriminately to modern nations, and refusing to give religious personalities an authority that belongs to Christ.

It also means recognizing that somebody can occasionally say something correct without being a reliable guide to Christian doctrine. Agreement on a particular political or prophetic issue does not establish theological credibility.

Conclusion: Armstrongism's borrowed authorities

Perhaps the greatest irony is that a movement claiming to have restored the truths of the Bible appears so dependent upon outside personalities to keep its prophetic imagination alive. One day it is Herbert Armstrong, another day it is some modern prophetic commentator, another day it is WND, and another day it is the latest book promising to uncover some mysterious biblical warning about America.

The personalities change, the sensational headlines change, and the supposed prophetic discoveries change, but the underlying obsession remains.

Meanwhile, the New Covenant continues to point believers in an entirely different direction.

Christ does not need Herbert Armstrong to complete His work. He does not need Jonathan Cahn to uncover hidden warnings in Isaiah. He does not need WND to explain the destiny of America, nor does He need another self-appointed interpreter to reveal some supposedly forgotten biblical mystery.

The finished work of Christ is sufficient.

Perhaps Armstrongism should spend less time collecting borrowed prophets, political commentators, and prophetic celebrities and considerably more time understanding the covenant established through Jesus Christ.

After all, if Christ is truly sufficient, why does Armstrongism continually need somebody else to tell its followers what God supposedly meant?

UCG: Fourth-Generation Faith, First-Generation Fractures: A Testimony of the System Working Exactly as Designed

UCG's Amber Duran, pastor's wife and editor for Beyond Today, has an article up titled "Broken Home: Unbroken Faith" (Compass Check, Fall 2026) on the United Church of God site. It is a personal testimony of a fourth-generation COG member (great-grandmother heard Herbert W. Armstrong on the radio) whose parents divorced when she was young. She describes the pain, the forced choices between parents, navigating Sabbath-keeping at her non-member father's house, finding "family" in the local congregation, learning to forgive, and later marrying equally yoked within the system. It repeatedly elevates God's original design for lifelong marriage, the church as spiritual family, and the liberating power of forgiveness (citing Colossians 3:13, etc.).

On its face, some of the personal reflections and the call to forgive are unobjectionable. The problem is the source and the selective memory.

The Worldwide Church of God (the mother body from which UCG split in 1995) and its Armstrongist offshoots systematically prioritized organizational loyalty and distinctive doctrines over natural family bonds for decades:

• Early WCG doctrine on divorce and remarriage was so rigid that people in second marriages were frequently required to separate to be baptized or remain in good standing. This produced a class of "spiritual widows" (and widowers) supported by third-tithe funds. Herbert Armstrong later loosened the policy in 1974 partly because it was costing members and creating practical chaos. The article's nostalgia for "God's design" ignores that the organization itself manufactured broken homes under the banner of purity.

• Herbert Armstrong's own writings on disfellowshipping were explicit. In pieces such as "When One Is Disfellowshipped - Which Family Comes First?" he argued that membership in the "God Family" (the church) took precedence, and that members were to "avoid" even close relatives who had been marked for causing division or offenses "contrary to the doctrine." He invoked Romans 16:17 and 2 Thessalonians 3 alongside Matthew 10:36-37. The natural family was secondary when it conflicted with church discipline.

• Disfellowshipping (the Armstrongist version of shunning) was a real tool. It was applied for doctrinal dissent, "causing division," or lifestyle issues. While UCG's formal policy today is more measured than the Philadelphia Church of God's hardline version, the inherited culture still treats departure or questioning of core Armstrongist distinctives (Sabbath, holy days, tithing system, exclusive or near-exclusive "truth," etc.) as spiritually dangerous. That pressure has split households for generations.

The 1995 formation of UCG itself was a massive family-and-congregation fracture. When the post-Armstrong Worldwide Church of God under the Tkaches abandoned the distinctive Armstrongist package (British-Israelism, mandatory holy days, non-Trinitarian "God family" theology, etc.), large numbers of ministers and members left to preserve the old system. Critics at the time noted that many stayed until the doctrinal changes became irreversible-when the paycheck and institutional structure were clearly at risk. UCG was created so that ministers could continue being supported by the tithe system while keeping the legalistic framework. The "just so their ministers could still get paid" observation is not invented; it is how the largest offshoots were born.

UCG still counsels strongly against marrying outside the faith, treats unequally yoked situations as inherently strained, and maintains suspension/disfellowshipping procedures for division or habitual unrepentant sin. The article's own author grew up navigating the friction between church rules and a non-believing parent. That friction was not an accident; it is a design feature of the system.

The New Covenant has this to say.

The New Covenant is not a refined Mosaic administration with new management. It is the finished work of Christ that ends the old covenant system of works, days, foods, and priestly hierarchies as the means of standing before God (Galatians 3-5; Romans 7; Colossians 2; Hebrews 8-10).

What it requires of believers regarding family and relationships is straightforward:

• Forgive as Christ forgave you (Colossians 3:13; Ephesians 4:32). Forgiveness is releasing the claim to vengeance; it does not require pretending sin is not sin or immediately restoring trust where repentance is absent.

• Love one another and pursue peace (John 13:34-35; Romans 12:18). The law of Christ is love, not institutional loyalty tests.

• Honor parents and care for one's own household (Ephesians 6:1-3; 1 Timothy 5:8). Jesus' hard saying in Matthew 10:34-37 is real-following him can cost family relationships-but it is about allegiance to him, not to a corporate church hierarchy, a Council of Elders, or a unique set of Armstrongist doctrines. It is not a license for ministers to manufacture division so the organization stays intact and funded.

• Reconciliation where possible (2 Corinthians 5:18-20). The New Covenant ministry is one of reconciliation, not perpetual marking and avoiding over secondary matters.

Armstrongism inverted this. It made distinctive practices and loyalty to "the one true church" (or the current pure remnant) the measure of faithfulness. The result was exactly the family fractures the UCG article now laments and spiritualizes as refining fire. The church becomes the real family; the natural family is dispensable when it gets in the way of the system.

The personal pain in the article is real. Many children of divorce and many former members of these groups carry scars. But publishing a piece that treats the church organization as the healing family while the same tradition spent decades splitting households to protect its doctrines and its payroll is not prophetic. It is selective. The New Covenant does not demand that anyone keep funding or submitting to a hierarchy that treats natural family ties as secondary to institutional continuity. It demands that people follow Christ, extend grace, and stop elevating man-made walls (whether Sabbath enforcement against family, shunning, or exclusive claims) above the law of love.

Silent Pilgrim

---------------------

I’ll never forget the first Bible study I ever did on my own.

I was in fourth or fifth grade, and my parents had been divorced since I was 4 years old. During one of our weekly Wednesday night visits, my dad sat me down and began to say some not-so-nice things about my church.

“Your church is a cult,” he said, and proceeded to toss a book about cults into my elementary-school lap, which included a section about the Worldwide Church of God.
I timidly shrugged and replied, “I just believe what the Bible says.” I had no idea how to talk to my unbelieving father about what I believed, nor did I ever think I would have to defend my faith to my own dad. But there I was, doing just that.

I was sweating, my stomach churned and I was on the verge of tears. I went home, pulled out my Bible and found every reference I could on divorce. I remember reading Malachi 2:16 and connecting deeply with it: “For the Lord God of Israel says that He hates divorce, for it covers one’s garment with violence.” The truth of that scripture resounded in my heart—this was violence. What once was whole was now in pieces.

The painful separation of my family made me wonder:
How was I supposed to be happy? How could I ever be successful? Would I ever be able to rear a family of my own some day?
Life with an unbelieving parent

I’m what some call a fourth-generation Christian. God started weaving His truth into my family’s story all the way back in the days of my great-grandmother, when she began to listen to Herbert W. Armstrong on the radio.

My mother met my father in high school, and they were married just before her first son was born. She was called and baptized into God’s Church, while my father, who was raised Catholic, never really practiced any religion of his own. My mother raised my two brothers and I in the faith, but because my father never shared my mother’s faith, there was a natural disconnect between them.

I have very little memory of the years my parents were together. Because they split when I was so young, the separation and divorce feel like my first memory of them both—I don’t really remember any part of my childhood when both my parents were in the home together.

Unfortunately, my parents’ divorce was not very amicable and that put my brothers and me in uncomfortable positions far too often. Many times, we were forced to choose which parent we wanted to spend time with, and how often. I can remember the intense inner turmoil and the extreme guilt I felt if I wanted to go with my dad, because then that meant I was leaving my mom alone. The hurt she felt was always plain on her face and in her tears. There was no right choice, but a choice had to be made nonetheless.

Sometimes my dad would take us over a weekend. When this happened, we would have to make personal choices about the Sabbath and how to keep it holy, even when we were encouraged to play video games or go to the mall or a waterpark. As respectfully and quietly as possible, we navigated those waters.

I don’t believe that my parents put me in these positions maliciously. I never believed their divorce was my fault, but that didn’t make life any easier, and I had to grow up quickly. Even if my parents had chosen to remain together, there would always have been some degree of strain or separation between them, because they didn’t agree about God’s truth.
God’s family design

These are issues God never wanted children (or adults) to face, and I share my story with the goal of offering hope and encouragement to you if you’re going through a similar situation. Instead, the Eternal designed marriage to be a lifelong covenant between a husband and wife, and He established the family unit to depict the spiritual family He is in the process of building! Although Scripture recognizes limited circumstances in which separation or divorce may become necessary or permissible, those exceptions do not change God’s original design for marriage

From the beginning, God created us in His image and said, “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:27-28).He engineered marriage to stand as a sacred covenant, where two become one (Genesis 2:24). The marital relationship between a husband and his wife is intended to represent the loving relationship between Jesus Christ and His Church (Ephesians 5:31-32). Children from this union—when viewed how God views them—are considered a blessing, a “heritage from the Lord. . . a reward” (Psalm 127:3)!

Matthew 19:6 says,

“What God has joined together, let not man separate,” and in verse 8, Jesus makes clear that He had only permitted divorce as a concession for “the hardness of [their] hearts.”

Although God’s intended family design wasn’t what I experienced growing up, that didn’t mean He was going to abandon me, and, similarly, He won’t desert you. In Hebrews 13:5 we are reminded that the Almighty will not leave or forsake us; He will not abandon those He is calling. He can provide care, guidance and meaningful spiritual family relationships through His Church. It’s as if He extends His hand to us as a loving Father does, and says, I’ll show you the way. Follow me, child. For me, this way led directly to His Church.

I lived with my mother and had once-a-week visits at my dad’s house after school. I saw my school and Church friends more than I saw my own father, which is odd to think about.

When I would read my Bible or hear sermons at services about God being a Father and wanting to build a family, I paid attention. I needed a family. My brothers needed a family. And we not only found that in God, but in the Church that He gave us.

We found fathers and mothers in our local congregation—men and women with families of their own who took the time to build relationships with us and fulfilled aspects of family for us that we never had. Fathers would take my brothers out hunting or teach them new skills. Mothers would check in to see how I was doing and would take me under their wing. It is truly a treasured gift that God gives to us through the assembly that He calls. To this day, the Church is my family. When members of the Church seek opportunities to practice Galatians 6:10, doing “good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith,” beautiful things happen for a child like me, who found a healthy family life at Church.

When things felt especially hard through the years, Scripture reminded me that difficult times aren’t without purpose. In fact, trials and challenges produce wonderful things!


“That the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:7).

For me and many others, too, that refinement process began at a young age. And even though it’s a painful thing to recollect or reflect on, that pain produced something greater in me: “. . . tribulation produces perseverance; and perseverance, character; and character, hope” (Romans 5:3-4).

Everything I needed for a good life was found in God’s Word and His guidance. I owe my life and success all to God.
A higher calling

Mankind’s track record shows us that earthly families will have problems. Every person makes mistakes (Romans 3:23), and some are worse than others. However, when we learn to forgive at a young age, it can provide us with an incredibly liberating and peace-giving experience. Even when someone has not asked for forgiveness, we can choose to release bitterness, refuse to seek revenge and maintain a heart that is ready to forgive. Reconciliation and the restoration of trust, however, require genuine repentance and demonstrated change. In Colossians 3:13, Paul speaks plainly to the Church of God, reminding them that Christ’s disciples are responsible for “bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.”

In my Christian walk, I’ve come to learn that I love God’s law. Many will claim that it’s a burden that keeps us from doing fun things like going out with friends on the Sabbath or playing sports or participating in tournaments during the Sabbath. But, trust me when I say, those things do not matter as much as you might think they do—they’re so fleeting! And they’re nothing in comparison to the peace and the joy that obeying God brings to you.

Once you’ve chosen to release bitterness and maintain a forgiving heart—not just saying the words because it’s what you’re supposed to do, but deeply and inwardly letting go of the hurt—there’s no greater relief! A very real weight is lifted from your shoulders. You can begin to heal even when reconciliation or restored trust is not yet possible.

I deeply love both my father and mother. I love my stepmother. And my children love them, too. They are my family. I’ve grown up in God’s way and chose to commit my life fully to that way in 2011 when I was baptized. I’ve been married to my wonderful husband for almost 16 years, and we share the same faith. As is discussed in Amos 3:3 and 2 Corinthians 6:14-17, I am enjoying the wonderful fruits of being “equally yoked” with my husband. We are blessed to have two beautiful children learning this way, too. I learned how a family should operate through God’s Word, and I follow His lead.

Every family is different; every divorce is different. For my parents, the divorce wasn’t amicable, though for some it may be. Some families endure much greater turmoil than I. However, one thing is constant, unchanging, timeless—it’s God’s love, faithfulness and commitment toward us (Joshua 1:9; Hebrews 13:8). We can rely on Him, depend on Him, trust in Him.

So, regardless of your circumstances or the challenges in your family situation, remember to lean on the One who is our Creator, who formed us in the womb, knows us completely and loves us deeply (Psalm 139:13-16). Whether you live under one roof or two, you are always at home with God.

Amber Duran lives in Loveland, OH, with her two boys and husband, Andy, who pastors the Cincinnati East and North congregations. She also works as an associate editor for Beyond Today magazine.

UPDATED: PCG: Flurry Clan Burns More Tithe Money On Trip To Ireland

A Gulfstream G-IV (G4) flying from Edmond, Oklahoma, to Shannon, Ireland, and returning would likely cost approximately $150,000–$220,000 for the complete round trip, depending on fuel prices, flight routing, crew expenses, and whether the aircraft has to remain in Ireland.

That is an estimated aircraft operating and trip cost, not necessarily the amount an organization actually paid.

Estimated flight breakdown

The distance from Edmond to Shannon is approximately 3,697 nautical miles one way, or 7,393 nautical miles round trip.

Flight time, both directions
15–17 hours

Fuel
$50,000–$65,000

Crew and flight operations
$20,000–$30,000

Maintenance and engine reserves
$25,000–$35,000

Airport, landing and handling fees
$5,000–$12,000

Overnight crew expenses and miscellaneous
$3,000–$8,000

These are planning estimates, not an actual invoice. Some categories overlap with published hourly operating-cost calculations, so they should not simply be added together.

If the church owns and operates the aircraft
$130,000–$160,000

Published figures support these estimates:

CRAFT's Gulfstream GIV cost analysis lists charter rates of $14,500–$16,500 per hour and fuel consumption around 447 gallons per hour.

GlobalAir's GIV operating-cost report lists an estimated total operating cost of $8,148 per flight hour.

Guardian Jet's GIV specifications lists a nominal range of 3,800 nautical miles.

One important consideration: The westbound return flight from Ireland to Oklahoma could be more challenging because of prevailing headwinds. The G-IV's published range is approximately 3,800 nautical miles, making this route close to its nominal range. A fuel stop could therefore be necessary, depending on the aircraft configuration, payload, weather and routing.

Bottom line

If we're examining the expense of a Philadelphia Church of God trip to Ireland using this aircraft,  $150,000 is a reasonable working estimate for the round-trip operating expense, while recognizing that the actual amount could be higher.

That's a substantial amount of money to consider when evaluating how church contributions are being spent.  AI sources on estimates

November 4, 2026 Philadelphia Church of God (Gerald Flurry) - Gulfstream G4 from Oklahoma City, OK to Shannon, Ireland. https://t.co/lBF3wwr8Ry

— pastorplanes (@pastorplanes) November 5, 2026

Armstrongism: Still Standing at Mount Sinai While Christ Has Moved On

 

Armstrongism: Still Standing at Mount Sinai While Christ Has Moved On

By a Concerned Believer 

Armstrongism's deepest contradiction may be its insistence that Christians return to the Old Covenant while claiming a clearer grasp of the New Covenant than other Christians. After nearly two thousand years, you might expect Jesus Christ's message to have settled the issue. It has not. Armstrongism continues trying to keep Moses' religious system in operation, despite the New Testament's clear claim that Christ fulfilled the Old Covenant and established something greater.

At Mount Sinai, God made the Old Covenant with Israel. Its commandments shaped the nation's life, while priests, sacrifices, ceremonial rules, and temple worship governed how the people approached God. The arrangement had a defined purpose: it showed God's holiness, revealed human sin, preserved Israel as the people from whom the Messiah would come, and directed attention toward Christ. It was not meant to last forever or give humanity a way to earn righteousness and salvation. Paul called the Law a schoolmaster that led people to Christ (Galatians 3:24). It exposed sin, and the sacrifices made clear that repeated animal offerings could never meet humanity's deeper need.

That something was Jesus Christ.

At the Last Supper, Jesus said the cup signified the New Covenant sealed by His blood (Luke 22:20). He was the perfect sacrifice and eternal High Priest who mediates a better covenant, one founded on better promises (Hebrews 8:6). With Him, the reality anticipated by the earthly priesthood, sacrifices, and temple had arrived; those arrangements had completed their purpose. The shadow yielded to the substance.

Yet Armstrongism apparently missed the memo.

Armstrongism does not let Christ's fulfillment of the Old Covenant shape Christian life. Instead, it turns back to Sinai and treats practices such as Sabbath and holy day observance, dietary rules, and tithing as requirements for faithful Christians. Members are told that following these rules separates the truly obedient from Christians deemed deceived because they have misunderstood God's instructions.

Apparently, Christ's finished work needs a little help from the church calendar.

The New Testament does not present the New Covenant as a revised form of Moses' religious system. Hebrews 8:13 says plainly that, by establishing a New Covenant, God made the first one obsolete. Paul draws the contrast even more sharply in 2 Corinthians 3: the Old Covenant was written on stone tablets, whereas the New Covenant brings the ministry of the Spirit. God's work no longer revolves around external regulations; it changes the human heart through the Holy Spirit.

Christians are not therefore free to live for themselves or discard moral responsibility. Grace does not excuse sinful behavior. Titus 2:11-12 says that grace teaches believers to turn from ungodliness and live rightly. Obedience follows salvation; it does not purchase it. Christians obey because they belong to Christ, rather than trying to earn acceptance by completing an elaborate set of covenant obligations.

Unfortunately, Armstrongism keeps treating the two as though they were the same. Obedience should grow out of a changed heart; instead, it becomes a religious yardstick. Following the right day and calendar, observing dietary rules, and accepting organizational teachings are presented as proof of spiritual superiority. The New Testament, by contrast, gives far greater weight to love, mercy, forgiveness, humility, and the fruit of the Spirit.

It's easy to spend hours working out holy days and scrutinizing food rules, then miss the far harder work of loving your neighbor.

Paul faced the same mindset in Galatians. Some believers were being urged to add Old Covenant requirements to their Christian faith, as though faith in Christ were insufficient by itself. Paul did not praise them for reviving neglected commandments; he warned that this return placed them back under bondage. Anyone seeking justification through the Law, he argued, was denying the sufficiency of Christ (Galatians 5:1-4). That warning still speaks to movements claiming that Christians must follow Mosaic regulations to prove their faithfulness.

Armstrongism also misses a major change introduced by the New Covenant: through Jesus Christ, believers can approach God directly. The Old Covenant tied sanctuary access to an earthly priesthood and sacrifices. Christ, however, is the eternal High Priest, and His sacrifice allows believers to come before God with confidence (Hebrews 10:19-22).

Armstrongist groups often rebuild the religious hierarchy that Christ's ministry rendered unnecessary. Ministers and church leaders receive unusual authority, while self-appointed prophets claim a special grasp of truth, unique commissions, or sole responsibility for restoring doctrines they say everyone else lost. Members are then directed to these men for spiritual guidance and prophetic interpretation, despite Christ having already provided the way believers approach the Father.

Apparently, the New Covenant needs an institutional middleman after all.

This legalistic mindset brings familiar results. People start judging their standing with God by visible religious behavior and loyalty to an organization. Some grow convinced that they are spiritually superior; others worry endlessly that they have not done enough. Legalism breeds pride and fear alike, and neither reflects the freedom Paul describes in Christ.

The irony is hard to miss: Armstrongism often charges mainstream Christianity with abandoning God's commandments, yet it misunderstands the relationship between the Old Covenant and life under the New. Though it claims to defend biblical truth, it keeps directing believers back to the covenant that Hebrews calls obsolete. Christ is celebrated, but Moses remains the practical center of its religious identity.

If Christ completed the Law, offered the final sacrifice, established a superior covenant, and gave believers direct access to the Father, why does Armstrongism keep acting as though Christians must go back to Sinai and complete what remains?

Legalistic religion feels safer when faith can be reduced to rules, boundaries, and visible performance. Grace resists that kind of control: it directs attention to Christ instead of institutional authority. Organizations can count attendance, observance, tithes, and compliance. Genuine love, humility, mercy, and spiritual maturity are far harder to measure.

And therein lies the problem.

Christ Is Not an Amendment to Moses

The Old Covenant was no error. God used it for His purpose, and it directed people toward the Messiah who was to come. Still, a shadow cannot replace what it represents; preparation was meant to lead somewhere. Jesus did not give His blood to create another system of rules for people to uphold. He came to reconcile humanity with God and establish a New Covenant based on better promises.

Armstrongism faces an awkward biblical problem: it cannot keep proclaiming Christ's superiority while treating Moses' religious requirements as the measure of Christian faithfulness. Nor can it praise grace and still burden believers with obligations the apostles refused to impose on Gentile Christians.

The New Covenant does not restore Mount Sinai. Nor does it depend on Herbert Armstrong, Bob Thiel, or any other self-appointed religious authority to repair it or add commandments claimed to have been forgotten. Christ is sufficient; His sacrifice is complete, and His covenant is better.

Perhaps Armstrongism should stop fixating on stone tablets and turn its attention to the One who fulfilled what they never could.

The shadow has done its work; the reality is here. His name is Jesus Christ. Keeping the Sabbath, observing holy days, or twisting Armstrongist theology cannot make Moses the mediator of the New Covenant again.

The Value of “Wisdom” According to LCG (Or: How to Quote Solomon While Quietly Ignoring the One Greater Than Solomon)

Douglas S. Winnail has once again reminded the Living Church of God faithful that wisdom is really valuable. Greater than rubies. Greater than gold. The key, he says, is a proper fear of God and obedience to God’s instructions. Then he dutifully wheels out the usual proof texts: Proverbs, a quick nod to the child Jesus increasing in wisdom, James 1:5, and 2 Timothy 3:14-17. The punchline? Follow these instructions so you can become more useful instruments in God’s hands.

How convenient.

Let’s set the Old Covenant scroll aside for a moment and ask the obvious question the note carefully avoids: what does the New Covenant actually say wisdom is?

Paul does not say Christ is a really helpful example of someone who kept the instructions so you should go do likewise. He says Christ is the wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:24, 30). Not a pointer toward more law-keeping. The thing itself. The wisdom of God is a person, not a checklist of holy days, clean meats, and second-tithe accounting rules that LCG still treats as the gold standard of spiritual maturity.

Solomon wrote Proverbs under the Old Covenant. He was the wisest man of his era, and it still wasn’t enough to keep him from accumulating a thousand wives and turning his heart after other gods. Jesus explicitly claimed to be greater than Solomon (Matthew 12:42). The one “greater than Solomon” did not arrive to hand out a slightly improved version of the Mosaic instructions. He arrived to fulfill them and then write something better on the hearts of those who believe (Hebrews 8:10; 10:16). That is the New Covenant. Winnail’s note treats the New Covenant as if it is merely the Old one with better lighting.

“Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” is true. It is also true that perfect love casts out fear (1 John 4:18). The New Covenant does not leave people perpetually trembling under a system of external obedience so they can stay “useful.” It gives the Spirit so that the law is no longer something you strive to perform from the outside; it becomes the natural fruit of a new heart. LCG’s version of wisdom has a curious habit of translating into more fear of missing a feast, more fear of the second tithe audit, and more fear of the minister who might decide you are no longer useful enough.

James 1:5 is about asking for wisdom in the middle of trials, not about asking for clearer instructions on which meats are still unclean or how much of your income must be routed through the church’s bank account. And 2 Timothy 3:15 does not say the Scriptures make you wise so you can become a more reliable instrument for organizational ends. It says they make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Salvation. Through faith. Not through demonstrated obedience to a filtered set of Old Covenant regulations that the Living Church of God has decided are still binding while the rest of the book of Hebrews is quietly de-emphasized.

The child Jesus increased in wisdom, stature, and favor. Adult Jesus then went to the cross, rose, and poured out the Spirit. The “instructions” that mattered after that were not a call to re-enact Solomon’s court or Moses’ camp. They were a call to believe, to receive the Spirit, and to walk in the freedom of the New Covenant rather than the yoke that neither the fathers nor the apostles were able to bear (Acts 15:10).

Winnail closes by urging the faithful to follow “these instructions” so they can be useful instruments. Useful to whom, exactly? The God who already declared the work finished, or the organization that still needs a steady stream of obedient members who never quite grow out of the fear-based system that keeps the lights on?

Solomon’s wisdom was real. It was also incomplete. The New Covenant does not invite you to go back and polish the incomplete version. It offers the wisdom of God Himself—Christ—apart from the works of the law. That is not a minor adjustment to Winnail’s note. It is the reason the note, for all its polished Proverbs citations, still manages to miss the point.

Silent Pilgrim

Living Church of God Celebrates Historic Mind Numbing Victory: Six People Showed Up

In a stunning display of prophetic momentum that can only be described as "encouraging" if you squint hard enough and ignore basic arithmetic, the Living Church of God recently reported the results of its latest Tomorrow's World Presentations. In Amherst, Nova Scotia, six guests materialized out of 263 invited subscribers. The follow-up in Fredericton, New Brunswick, managed three visitors. Headquarters promptly informed the flock that this was an encouraging turnout and asked everyone to keep praying and supporting the effort.

Let's pause for a moment of quiet awe. Six people. From two hundred and sixty-three invitations. That is roughly a 2.3 percent response rate. In the world of direct-mail marketing, that might be considered respectable for selling driveway sealant. For a group that claims to be restoring original Christianity, preaching the pure Gospel, and serving as a witness to the nations while the British-descended peoples face decline (the actual topic of at least one of these Canadian events), it is something closer to a rounding error. Yet LCG treats it like the early church in Jerusalem, only with fewer people and more hotel conference rooms.

This is the same pattern that has defined Tomorrow's World Presentations for nearly two decades. Over the years the organization has conducted well over a thousand of these events across hundreds of cities. Cumulative guest totals have climbed into the tens of thousands. The conversion rate into actual, sustained membership, however, has remained microscopic. Many of the "guests" who do appear are already Church of God members from other groups shopping for a slightly different flavor of Sabbath-keeping, Holy Day observance, and tithing. The rest tend to drift away once they discover that "restoring original Christianity" means treating the New Covenant as little more than a slightly updated version of the Old one, complete with the same dietary rules, calendar, and financial requirements.

The numbers are consistent with the larger picture. LCG's worldwide Feast of Tabernacles attendance in recent years has hovered in the 9,000-11,000 range (including some online and shut-in participation). Membership, including children, remains in the low tens of thousands at most, spread across hundreds of mostly small congregations. For a movement that once filled Ambassador Auditorium and claimed it was doing a work that would reach the whole world before the end, these figures represent stagnation dressed up as faithfulness. The "little flock" verse from Luke 12:32 is endlessly useful for this purpose: any failure can be reframed as divine preference for quality over quantity.

What the numbers actually reveal is a message that has lost whatever cultural traction it once had. People in 2026 are not lining up to hear that they must keep the seventh-day Sabbath, observe the Old Testament festivals, and send a portion of their income to Charlotte in order to be part of the true church. The New Covenant announcement-that Christ has fulfilled the law, that justification is by faith, and that the Spirit writes the law on the heart rather than on stone-has far more explanatory power and far less administrative overhead. Armstrongism's version of "the Gospel of the Kingdom" still requires an elaborate infrastructure of ministers, literature, and prophetic timelines that keep failing to deliver on their own terms. When only a handful of the already-interested show up, the honest response would be reflection. The institutional response is to call six people an encouraging start and schedule the next round in Kitchener/Guelph and Springfield, Illinois.

Armstrongism as a broader phenomenon is aging out. The original Worldwide Church of God generation is largely gone. The various splinter groups continue to divide, rebrand, and insist that this time the real work is finally beginning. Meanwhile, the actual New Covenant message continues to draw people without requiring them to adopt a 20th-century American reconstruction of ancient Israelite religion. LCG can keep mailing invitations and celebrating single-digit turnouts. Reality, however, keeps delivering the same quiet verdict: the appeal is gone, the numbers are pathetic, and no amount of internal cheerleading changes the arithmetic.