* LCG News *  2005 Feast of Tabernacles Sites  * Listing of Living Church of God Congregations *Sunset Times for the U.S. *  News of Those Once Affiliated with the Global COG   * Prayer Requests * Official Living Church of God What's New? page.

Click Here for the COGwriter Home Page which has articles on various sabbatarian Churches of God (COGs) and articles supporting beliefs of the Philadelphia portion of the Church of God.

03/14/06 a.m. UCG reports:

The Australian National Council has been researching the possibility of printing The Good News copies for Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and Singapore in Sydney .

The research project was initiated by the UCG IA home office to see if freight costs could be reduced...

Australian Web Site Becoming Point of First Contact

The Australian UCG Web site (www.ucg.org.au) has been gathering strength as a principal means of first contact.

During the past year the Web site was developed and improved to take maximum advantage of this fact, using in particular the promotional services provided by Google to advertise our magazines and booklets.

When Internet users type specific keywords into search engines linked to our Internet advertisements, these advertisements guide them to our Web site.

In this financial year:

•3,991 new Good News subscribers have been added by the Australian office.

•58.36 percent of these new subscribers were provided by the Internet.

•Google ads have been shown over 8,500,000 times.

• 43,627 people have read the offer pages.

80,687 people have visited the Australian Web site.

We will continue to see the internet as an important tool within the COGs.

From Christianity Today:

Christianity Today - Feb 9, 2006

Carlton Pearson, a high-profile pastor who lost 90 percent of his church's 5,000 members after publicly teaching that everyone will eventually be saved, held the final service in his church building on New Year's Eve.With its property lost in foreclosure and sold to an investment company, Higher Dimensions Family Church now meets as New Dimensions Worship Center on Sunday afternoons at an Episcopal church.Higher Dimensions, founded by Pearson in 1981, was one of Tulsa, Oklahoma's largest and most prosperous churches. Its high-energy, sharply dressed pastor appeared regularly on the Trinity Broadcasting Network and at national conferences, wrote several books, and hosted an annual Azusa Street conference that drew national figures such as T. D. Jakes.Pearson also ran for mayor of Tulsa, earned a Grammy nomination, and met with President Bush in a small group of black church leaders.

Higher Dimensions' slide began about four years ago when Pearson began preaching a form of universalism that alienated his Pentecostal/evangelical followers. His "gospel of inclusion"—that Christ died for the sins of the world, and therefore the whole world will be saved—denied the classic Christian belief that salvation involves turning from sin and accepting God's forgiveness through faith in Jesus.

Carlton Pearson gets is almost right. God is a God of love and NEARLY all will be saved as they will decide to turn from sin and accept God's forgiveness through Jesus. This is discussed in the article Hope of Salvation: How the COGs differ from most Protestants.

I have noticed that many are looking into the king of the South issue again a lot lately. Some, such as PCG teach that it is Iran. Others, such as UCG say that it may be Iran. Others, such as LCG, teaches that it cannot be Iran. And still others (mainly independents or those once affiliated with GCG) suggest that HWA never taught a future king of the South. While others claim that HWA never authorized any changes to suggest that it would not be Ethiopia.

Various quotes and scriptures on this subject are included in the article Is there a future King of the South?

I do have plans to cover other prophetic subjects here in more detail at a later time.

03/13/06 a.m. At its Vision site, COGaic has this item:

The Dawning of Cell-Based Medicine   In the next few decades scientists say we will witness an explosion of new discoveries and advancements from the medical community that will present difficult ethical challenges.

In a world that condones partial-birth abortions, its medical community (which performs those "operations") really cannot be trusted to make proper ethical decisions.

Note to xCG's Jared Olar: What I believe that HWA taught in the 12/17/83 sermon, that I referred to, was that God used him to restore 18 truths to the Philadelphia era of the true Church of God that the Ephesus era (which began circa 30 A.D.) once had. The identity of the final end-time Elijah was never one of those 18 truths. HWA also taught that by the beginning of the Philadelphia era, the Sardis Church, had lost those particular truths--neither he, nor I, have identified precisely when each of the truths were lost. That is what he taught, that is what I taught.

Jared since you brought up a quote from that sermon that you believe disproves the above, perhaps I should add that the comment you mentioned about 53 A.D. needs to be understood in the context of the entire sermon. In that sermon, here is what HWA actually said about 53 A.D.:

Now in Galatians 1:6-7, I believe I'd better not take the time to read that, you read where the apostle Paul (and this was about 53 A.D., only about 22 years after the Church started), Paul found already they were turning to another gospel. They were beginning to turn to a gospel ABOUT Christ instead of the gospel OF Christ"...

The gospel, and the true gospel was first preached to the world precisely 100 time cycles after it was lost in 53 AD. It went out to the world on radio Luxembourg in Europe. For the first time it had gone coast to coast in the United States and Canada. And then it went to all of Europe 1900 years after Paul wrote in Galatians 1 that they turned to another gospel. A century of time cycles.

You seem to believe that the above is proof that HWA taught that no one in the church had all of those 18 truths as early as 53 A.D.--I do not believe that is quite correct. HWA specifically taught that a false gospel was known and being preached by 53 A.D. HWA never claimed that Paul or the other apostles taught a false gospel. HWA seems to be teaching that the continental European world had lost its understanding of what the gospel was as a false gospel was introduced by 53 A.D. HWA also seems to be saying that by reaching Europe in 1953, he was able to get to them, the true gospel in power that it had not had since 1953.

Since I have been discussing church history a lot lately, I thought this would be a good time to clarify what LCG actually teaches about it. Here are some of LCG's official statements on church history:

Official Statement of Fundamental Beliefs

The Living Church of God bases its beliefs on the Holy Bible, the inspired Word of God. Our doctrines, practices, policies and traditions have their roots in the Worldwide Church of God under the leadership of Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong who, in 1952, ordained Roderick C. Meredith (our Presiding Evangelist) as one of that organization’s first evangelists...

CHURCH HISTORY

The Living Church of God traces its history from the Apostolic Church in the Book of Acts (the Ephesian era) to the present. The message to the seven Churches in Revelation two and three successively shows the history of the true Church from that time forward. These seven Churches describe succeeding eras, or ages, of God’s Church. We believe that the Philadelphia era began in the 1930s, and that we are a continuation of that Philadelphia era (Official Statement of Fundamental Beliefs).

A related article of interest may be The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3.

And regarding HWA and Philadelphia, LCG had this published in the Living Church News:

Note that when the Church of God Seventh Day (CG7) split over governance in 1933, Mr. Armstrong did not go with the side that had the most votes, but cooperated with the side that lost the vote (Mystery of the Ages, pp. 558, 561). Once he understood God's form of governance he wrote: "The Church is organized under theocratic government, hierarchical in form" (Mystery of the Ages, p. 246).

"From the year 1931, exactly 1,900 years (a century of time cycles) from the foundation of the Church, this small remnant of the original true Church of God began to take on new life as the Philadelphia era… This era of the Church was to produce fruit…" (Mystery of the Ages, pp. 289-290). Then, "after 3 1/2 years of intensive study and training, Christ ordained me to preach this same Gospel of the Kingdom in all the world as a witness to all nations (Matthew 24:14). This ordination took place at, or very near, the Day of Pentecost, 1931" (Autobiography, p. 428).

Mr. Armstrong had preached before then, but "by this time my whole heart was in it" and he was able to do his first extended campaign (Autobiography, pp. 426, 430). In 1933, he refused to accept any salary from the Oregon Conference of CG7, and on October 9, 1933 he began proclaiming the gospel over radio, which he considered to be a door opened by God and "the start of the present work" (Autobiography, pp. 506, 507, 525, 529, 530). He felt "though we did not know it then, that a new era of the Church was dawning" (Autobiography, p. 526) (Living Church News, July-August 2001).

And those are my positions as well.

03/12/06 a.m. WCG somewhat made the news:

Churches involved in Graham crusade

By Elizabeth Ashby - St. Tammany NewsMarch 8, 2006

Several local churches are participating in this weekend's Celebration of Hope at the New Orleans Arena.

Many churches in St. Tammany Parish have signed on to participate in the free public event Saturday and Sunday. The Celebration of Hope will be led by evangelist Billy Graham and his son, Franklin Graham.

Participating churches include:From Slidell: Faith Church, First Baptist Church, Grace Memorial Baptist Church, Immanuel Baptist Church and Worldwide Church of God.

Source:  http://www.slidellsentry.com/articles/2006/03/08/news/news04.txt

This is not a surprise, but I thought readers may be interested in seeing this.

This morning, ICG sent out this report:

It has been an exciting week here at HQ.  Our second airing of the Garner Ted Armstrong program on the “I” network took place at 6:30 a.m. EST and Pacific as advertised.  We aired a program offering The Bible, Fact or Fiction and received nearly twice the number of last week, 388 responses to be exact. 

For its size, ICG seems to do reasonably well in responses.

LCG's latest update contains the following great news:

Wayne Pyle reports another very positive week of TV responses.  Last week’s program by Mr. Ames, How to Overcome Satan, is expected to draw more than 3,400 responses.  The responses to the previous week’s record-breaking program by Mr. Ames, Seven Satanic Deceptions, are nearing 5,000.  Mr. Pyle mentions that two 4,000-plus weekends back-to-back has given us two 15,000-plus months back-to-back, which has never happened before.  The year-to-date growth for the TV program is currently 28% over last year.

Today is the anniversary of the shooting in Brookfield. I have been covering it at my LCG news page for those interested in updates about it.

On other matters, I apparently struck a nerve with Jared at xCG, though I was really not trying to do that.

Herbert Armstrong used to say, "Don't believe me, believe what you read in your own Bibles". After Jesus Himself declared the word of God to be truth (John 17:17), He prayed that true believers would be sanctified (set apart) by the truth (vs. 19).

My articles on early church history are based up the truth. They are based upon the Bible, historical records, and often even statements from Roman Catholic scholars.

Even though, using those sources, I have clearly documented:

1. There is no proof that there were any bishops of Rome prior to the mid-second century,
2. The Church in Asia Minor was the predominant and faithful church in the second century,
3. The bishops of Rome were not considered to be popes prior to the end of the fourth century,
4. There are biblical prophecies and historical evidence that points to a succession of seven of God's churches that still exist until this day that the Bible shows could not have been based in Rome.

Jared prefers to believe that Rome is the church and had an earlier and clearer succession of leaders than the evidence I have looked at demonstrates. And he prefers to believe that there is no connection among the many non-Catholic groups that we in the COGs claim descent through. So, we will have to agree to disagree.

Those interested to determine the truth of these matters, may seriously wish to read the following three highly referenced documents:

The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3 Do they matter? Most say they must, but act like they do not. This article contains some history about the Church of God (sometimes referred to as the continuation of Primitive Christianity) over the past 2000 years.
What Does Rome Actually Teach About Early Church History? Although most believe that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that it has an unbroken line of succession of bishops beginning with Peter, with stories about most of them, Roman Catholic scholars know the truth of this matter. This eye-opening article is a must-read for any who really wants to know what Rome actually admits it knows about the early church.
Location of the Early Church: Another Look at Ephesus, Smyrna, and Rome What actually happened to the primitive Church? And did the Bible tell about this in advance?

Anyway, I updated that first article a bit sooner than expected (yesterday) because of the issues of the past few days. I did purchase a copy of Conybeare's Key of Truth a couple of months ago from G&S, but have not read much of it yet. And it is my intent to add some of that to the first article.

03/11/06 a.m. xCG's Jared Olar still has not addressed any of my comments disproving his three main positions against my historical articles (which presumably he might try to address later--I really do not think he had any proof for those positions/assertions and is trying to come up with some at this time).

Instead, his latest post seems to endorse at least partial proof of several of my points.

Jared now directly claims that the COGs cannot claim any of the Paulicians in their history as he claims that the Paulicians had no semblance of doctrine with the Church of God (COG). His main proof (other than his assertions) is a link to an article in The Catholic Encyclopedia that is against the Paulicians. Here is what he wrote:

Neither the Anabaptists (even anti-Trinitarian anabaptist sects), nor the Baptists, nor the seventh-day Sabbatarians who trace back to the English Baptists and Anglicans, have ever believed any distinctively Paulician doctrine. Read this and compare the Paulician doctrine to Anabaptist, Baptist, and Sabbatarian doctrine, and you’ll see what I mean.

The problem with this is two-fold:

1) As I and other COG historical writers have pointed out, not all the Roman Catholics called Paulicians were in the Church of God. Throughout history (e.g. please see the article, The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3, for one such example, which points this out) the true church has often been lumped together with others that the Romans considered to be heretical (even today the Romans consider us to be Protestant, but we are not, please see the articles Hope of Salvation: How the COGs differ from most Protestants, Sola Scriptura or Prima Luther? What Did Martin Luther Really Believe About the Bible?, and The Similarities and Dissimilarities between Martin Luther and Herbert Armstrong).

2) Note that his proof is the assertion that an article written by a Roman Catholic is proof that the Seventh Day Church of God never held any distinctively Paulician doctrine. And even though that is not an unbiased source, it does in fact have several quotes which show doctrines that even the Romans admit the Paulicians held that are still held by the COGs.

I actually did read and compare that article to some of our beliefs. Here are many quotes from his cited link (he left all these out of his commentary), with my comments in italics:

The origin of the name Paulician is obscure. Gibbon (Decline and Fall, liv), says it means "Disciples of St. Paul" (Photius, op. cit., II, 11; III, 10; VI, 4). Their special veneration for the Apostle, and their habit of renaming their leaders after his disciples lend some colour to this view. On the other hand, the form (Paulikianoi, not Paulianoi) is curious; and the name seems to have been used only by their opponents, who held that they were followers of Paul of Samosata (Conybeare, op. cit., cv). The birthplace of their founder evidently suggested this; but there is no connection between their doctrine and his. Photius relates that a certain Manichee woman, named Kallinike sent her two sons Paul and John to Armenia to propagate this heresy; the name is corrupted from Pauloioannoi (Friedrich op. cit., I). The existence of such persons is now generally denied. The latest authority, Ter-Mkrttschian (Die Paulicianer, 63), says the name is an Armenian diminutive and means "followers of little Paul", but does not explain who little Paul may be...

In Armenia the sect continued in the "Thonraketzi" founded by a certain Smbat in the ninth century. Conybeare attributes to this Smbat a work, "The Key of Truth", which he has edited. It accepts the Old Testament and the Sacraments of Baptism. Penance, and the Eucharist. This work especially has persuaded many writers that the Paulicians were much maligned people. But in any case it represents a very late stage of their history, and it is disputed whether it is really Paulician at all (Fortesque A. Transcribed by Richard L. George. Paulicians. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Thus, the Catholic Encyclopedia is essentially admitting that there were probably multiple groups called Paulicians--those who tended to believe the Apostle Paul, those who anti-Paulicians opponents who claimed (even though they were doctrinally different) followed Paul of Samosata, and others. This is clear Roman proof for my first point. This also means that we in the COGs need not accept Roman assertions about all the Paulician beliefs as an accurate representation as some were clearly not held by the true COG.

Here are more statements from that article:

Leo V, though an Iconoclast, tried to refute the accusation that he was a Paulician by persecuting them furiously. A great number of them at this time rebelled and fled to the Saracens. Sergius was killed in 835. Theodora, regent for her son Michael III, continued the persecution...

We hear continually of wars against the Saracens, Armenians, and Paulicians...

This eliminated the sect as a military power. Meanwhile other Paulicians, heretics but not rebels, lived in groups throughout the empire (ibid).

In other words, since the Paulicians and Pope Leo V were against idols, Leo decided he had to persecute them because he was accused of being a bit like them in that area. And additional persecution followed Leo's. The above quote also shows that there were Paulicians, who even though persecuted, would not fight back. This is because those truly in the Church of God were opposed to military participation (please see article Military Service and the COGs). This demonstrates both my first point (there were differing Paulicians) and my second point (some held COG doctrines).

Here is another statement from that article:

They honoured not the Cross, but only the book of the Gospel. They were Iconoclasts, rejecting all pictures (ibid).

Those of us in the COGs do not believe in honoring the cross as a symbol, we are iconoclasts (opposed to idols), and we reject all so-called pictures of God the Father and God the Son (Exodus 20:4-5). This proves my second point.

Here is another statement from that article:

The whole ecclesiastical hierarchy is bad, as also all Sacraments and ritual. They had a special aversion to monks (ibid).

We in the COGs reject all Catholic sacraments and related ritual. We oppose clerical celibacy and monasticism--thus this also proves my second point. Here are two articles of possible interest that demonstrate that celibacy and monasticism was not held by the early church: Was Celibacy Required for Early Bishops or Presbyters? and Did The Early Christian Church Practice Monasticism?

Again, here is another statement from that article:

Since Gibbon the Paulicians have often been described as a survival of early and pure Christianity, godly folk who clung to the Gospel, rejecting later superstitions, who were grossly calumniated by their opponents (ibid).

Gibbon was a historian who was not part of the COG. Notice that since his writings, more have admitted that part of the Paulicians were descendants of the early and pure Church. This is further proof of my overall point that even many Roman scholars understand that the COG version of history is more accurate than that often portrayed by the Vatican.

And finally, here are more statements from that article:

The emperor Alexius Comnenus is credited with having put an end to the heresy. During a residence at Philippopolis, he argued with them and converted all, or nearly all, back to the Church (so his daughter: "Alexias", XV, 9). From this time the Paulicians practically disappear from history. But they left traces of their heresy. In Bulgaria the Bogomile sect, which lasted through the Middle Ages and spread to the West in the form of Cathari, Albigenses, and other Manichaean heresies, is a continuation of Paulicianism. In Armenia, too, similar sects, derived from them, continue till our own time (ibid).

Thus, even Roman Catholic scholars know that it is possible that the Paulicians were the survivors of an early and pure Christianity and that they had spiritual descendants that continued into the future (such as those within the Thyatira era), as well into modern times!

Thus, xCG's alleged proof, actually proves that the Roman Catholics admit that what is essentially the COG position--There are non-Roman Christian groups that have existed throughout history that have a spiritual continuity, that these groups have ties to each other and to the original church, and that some from them still existed until at least the 20th century (and of course, we in the COGs still exist in the 21st century).

Since this article was written by a scholar that Jared apparently accepts (though who I feel made some errors that are outside the scope of this post), I hope he will realize that many aspects of this article completely demolish his arguments against me and the truth of COG history.

I would also point out that my copy of the book Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma also states that the Paulicians were amongst the most vocal against the Roman teaching on purgatory. And we in the COGs have always held that anti-purgatory position. Thus, Jared's proof about the Paulicians not having doctrines in common with seventh day Church of God groups is in error.

One 7th day Baptist historian noted:

Dissenters who kept the Sabbath, existed under different names from the time of the Pope to the Reformation. They were either the descendants of those who fled from the heathen persecutions previous to the time of Constantine, or else those who, when he began to rule the church and force false practices upon it, refused submission, and sought seclusion and freedom to obey God. In their earlier history they were known as Nazarenes, Cerinthians and Hypsistarii, and later, as Vaudois, Cathari, Toulousians, Albigenses, Petrobrusians, Passagii, and Waldenses...These widely scattered Sabbath reformers were our denominational ancestors (Lewis A.H. THE SABBATH FROM THE TIME OF CHRIST TO ITS APPEARANCE IN ENGLAND. Reprinted from "Seventh Day Baptists in Europe and America" Volume 1, 1910 pp 11-18).

I added a variety of the above quotes to my article The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3.

03/10/06 a.m. In yesterday's Home Office Update, UCG's President Killough mainly reported on the following two matters:

This weekend marks a very special milestone for the Houston, Texas, congregation, which is celebrating its 50th anniversary. Houston is well represented here at the home office, as several staff members, as well as a number of ABC students, have either our church roots or previous ministerial experience there. Jim and Sharron Franks, Tom and Sarah Kirkpatrick, Dave and Becky Johnson and Dee and I will be traveling there to join some 600 other members and ministers for this homecoming festivity...

On March 1 we wrapped up another successful meeting of the Council of Elders, where we focused primarily on the 2006-2007 Strategic Plan, Operation Plan and budget. We are going to present the General Conference of Elders, at the annual GCE meeting in May, a budget highlighted by a nearly 5 percent increase over this year's, which is very encouraging. I suppose we all scratch our heads at times when we look at the world's political, economic, military and moral condition, and wonder how much longer humanity can hold this thing together!

UCG's Peter Eddington also reported:

The March/April print run for The Good News magazine was 402,670 copies. With a renewal rate of approximately 25 percent, and with around 323,000 U.S. subscribers on file, this means we need to advertise and replace 121,000 subscribers per year who do not renew—which we are consistently doing.

While UCG's production of its flagship magazine is well below its reported levels, it appears that more people actually now read it as the Update had a graph of the number of actual subscribers per year.

On historical matters, the Sardis era of the Church ended up having some members in what is now the United Kingdom with parts such as the London Mill Yard Church. After migration to the what is now the U.S.A., most faithful ones here eventually essentially incorporated as the Church of God, Seventh Day (CG7). It seems to have come from the binitarian portion of the Anabaptist movement--which traced itself back to the Paulicians (Lee. F. The Anabaptists and their Stepchildren. http://www.reformed.org/sacramentology/lee/anab_002.html, 7/14/04).

G&S' Richard Nickels noted this about one from Sardis era in the late 17th century:

Joseph Davis, Sr., a member of the London Mill Yard Church, wrote in 1670 that he believed in one God the Father, one Lord Christ, and that the Holy Spirit is the power of God, not part of a "Trinity" (Nickels R. We are Sabbath-Keepers, Not Seventh-Day Adventists. http://www.giveshare.org/churchhistory/sda/064.sda.html 03/10/06).

The above is documented in the updated article Binitarian View: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning

03/09/06 a.m. The Journal posted this concerning Jim Rector:

Mr. Rector left the WCG in 1978 and didn't attend services with any church group until the mid-1980s when he discovered a Church of God International (CGI) congregation meeting near his home. In 1991 he left the CGI and soon formed Cornerstone Publications...

Funeral Arrangements and Condolences

Condolences can be sent to:

Katrina/Rita Rector, 3802 Olive Street, Texarkana, Texas 75503, USA

For those wanting to send fresh-cut flowers to the funeral home, the family is requesting live plants be sent instead. Because of time needed to secure burial permission on the family's private property in Mineral Springs, Arkansas, visitation at the funeral home will not occur until the middle of next week (week starting March 12th). The family therefore requests that plants not be sent to funeral home until the middle of March 12th week.

Visitation at funeral home and burial on private property ares open to anyone wishing to attend. The funeral home is located at:

Latimer Funeral Home, 115 E. Hempstead Street, Nashville, AR 71852, USA

I do not know Jim Rector's actual beliefs, but would presume they were somewhat similar to the Teachings of the Church of God, International.

Yesterday, I mentioned that there were three or four mains points that xCG's Jared Olar raised against me. I addressed most of them yesterday, but there are two points I would like to expand upon.

The first point concerns being born again at the resurrection. This was understood in the second century church, while Jared seems to insist that HWA invented it. Notice what Theophilus of Antioch (circa 180) wrote:

But the moon wanes monthly, and in a manner dies, being a type of man; then it is born again, and is crescent, for a pattern of the future resurrection (Theophilus of Antioch. To Autolycus, Book 2, Chapter XV. Translated by Marcus Dods, A.M. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 2. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

This quote shows that HWA's position that humans were to be "born again" at the resurrection was not a brand new invention but was taught by at least one that the Eastern Orthodox claim was a saint.

The second point is to clarify something about scholarship, as Jared actually wrote the following:

Thiel concurs with scholars who “admit” things that support his beliefs. Meanwhile I concur with scholars who disagree with his scholars. Now that we’re clear that, as he can marshal scholars who say things he likes to hear, so too can I marshal scholars who say things that I like to hear...

And you know, if you are not interested in the truth, but only supporting an opinion, you can pick and chose what to believe. However, the plain truth is that there have not ever been found any contemporaneous writings from or about the so-called early "bishops of Rome". Jared and others at xCG may wish to actually read the early documents as my position is both factual and historically accurate. I also heavily relied on the Bible in my historical articles, but Jared rarely mentions it in his attempted rebuttals of those articles.

The main so-called "scholar" that Jared and others seem to be referring to that said there were early bishops of Rome was Irenaeus, and Irenaeus claimed his information basically came from a tradition derived from the apostles, as Irenaeus wrote:

Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops...

The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric (Irenaeus. Adversus Haereses, Book III, Chapter 3, Verses 2,3. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

Yet, the Roman Catholic Church admits that at least part of that account of Irenaeus (circa 180 A.D.) regarding a tradition derived from the apostles that both Peter and Paul first started the great church in Rome and that they (NOT Peter alone) passed the leadership to Linus was in error. Notice this comment from the modern Catholic scholar F.A. Sullivan:

Irenaeus focuses on the church of Rome which he describes as "greatest, most ancient and known to all, founded and established by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul." Here we must acknowledge a bit of rhetoric, as the church of Rome was obviously not so ancient as those of Jerusalem or Antioch, nor was it actually founded by Peter or Paul (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 147).

The Catholic Encyclopedia also agrees with me here (and not Irenaeus) as it states this about Paul's epistle to the Romans:

Paul would have worded his Epistle otherwise, if the community addressed were even mediately indebted to his apostolate (Merk A. Transcribed by W.G. Kofron. Epistle to the Romans. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIII. Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Furthermore, the Bible clearly agrees with me, The Catholic Encyclopedia, and F.A. Sullivan here. The Bible shows that Paul did not start the Church in Rome--thus the apostolic tradition that Irenaeus relied on is a fraudulent one--as it is not true. For here is what Paul wrote to the church at Rome:

20. And I have so preached this Gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build
upon another mans foundation:
21. But as it is written, They to whom it hath not been preached of him, shall see: and they
that have not heard, shall understand.
22. For the which cause also I was hindered very much from coming unto you (Romans 15:20-22, Rheims NT of 1582, unless otherwise indicated).

There is no way that Paul could have written the above if he considered that he founded or co-founded the church in Rome as in these verses he explains that he did not first come to Rome lest he build on another man's foundation. (Note: I choose to use the Rheims New Testament of 1582 A.D. as this is considered to the Catholic standard English translation of the New Testament).

Catholic scholar F.A. Sullivan also further agrees, as he wrote:

...it doesn't appear that Paul ever appointed any one person as "resident bishop" over any of his churches...(Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 35).

And that is certainly correct concerning Rome.

xCG can chose to ignore the truths from the Bible and scholars, but the fact is that Roman Catholic scholars interested in the truth know that the version of Roman Catholic church history that the Vatican tends to want people to believe is not historically accurate.

The simple fact is that there is no proof of Rome being of major importance within Christendom until at least 150 years after Jesus died, and it may have been more like 250 years.

Two documented articles of related interest may be What Does Rome Actually Teach About Early Church History? and Location of the Early Church: Another Look at Ephesus, Smyrna, and Rome.

03/08/06 a.m. The Journal posted the following:

TEXARKANA, Texas--Jim Rector, founder of Cornerstone Publications, died in his sleep in the early morning hours of March 7th, 2006.

Jim, a longtime church member, started Cornerstone in 1991. Jim's funeral will be held in Nashville, Arkansas. More information regarding funeral arrangements and condolences will be posted as soon as it becomes available.

Dixon Cartwright also send me the following email:

Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 11:55:45 -0600

To all our friends,
Dad (Jim Rector) died early this morning in his sleep. He is finally out of
pain and no longer suffering, and was blessed to have so many who loved
him. Thank you all for all of your prayers, your support, and your love. He
loved all of you very, very much.

His body ! will be moved sometime today to the Latimer Funeral Home in
Nashville, Arkansas. Mother grew up in Mineral Springs, Arkansas, and we
are hoping to be able to bury him on our property there. We are planning a
graveside service at some point later in the week. As soon as we have more
information, we will send another email.

We plan to continue the work that Dad was called to do, at least in so far
as filling any tape and/or article requests.

In our Messiah's Name,

Katrina and Rita

I do not recall having any personal contact with Jim Rector, but pray that his family will have the peace and strength they need to deal with this loss.

On other matters, last weekend was the 10th Annual Shabbat Across America/Canada:

The tenth annual Shabbat Across America/Canada Program (SAA/C). Conceived of, and organized by the National Jewish Outreach Program, SAA/C represents a united effort by the Jewish community to renew interest in the fourth of the Ten Commandments – observing a weekly day of rest...

There will be] more than 600 synagogues [that] participate in Shabbat Across America/Canada this year. Designed to teach a generation of unaffiliated Jews about the beauty and significance of the Jewish Sabbath, “ Shabbat Across America/Canada ” is the first nationally orchestrated program which appeals to members of all major Jewish denominations. It was the first program aimed at uniting Jews across the United States and Canada through one single event. “ Shabbat Across America/Canada ” will take place in almost every city where there is a Jewish presence – from major Jewish geographical centers, such as New York, Los Angeles, and Toronto, to cities with smaller Jewish populations such as Monroe, LA and Albuquerque, NM. SAA/C is sponsored by the Melohn Family in honor of Mrs. Martha Melohn.

While in Long Beach 10 days ago, I heard it advertised on the radio. Essentially, the ad stated that the Shabbat (the Sabbath) is what unifies those who are Jewish.

xCG continues its rants against me. It is of interest to note that it spends 10-20 as much space attacking and covering me, than I do commenting on what they (mostly Jared Olar) write. And, it is also interesting that more seem to prefer to read what they say against me than to read what I actually write.

Some COGwriter readers have asked why I bother with those that have fallen away and who make so many errors. One of the reasons is that the COGwriter page is reaching more without a COG background and those individuals need to understand that the inaccurate statements made by critics are simply inaccurate.

xCG's emphasis of anti-COGwriter attacks began when Jared O. wrote several pages against an article I was having published in The Journal (the longer version of that article is available here Another Look at Ignatius). What was astounding to me, however, was the fact that he attacked the article before he even saw it. This type of writing without facts, but based on negative assumptions, is sadly to common in anti-COG circles.

Now those at xCG, like those of the J. Tkach administration, have their own view of what WCG taught about law and other matters. There are three-four items that Jared keeps bringing up, so perhaps for the benefit of all our readers, I will briefly address them (Jared seems convinced that I do not address his points because he is correct--that is not the case--it is just that he makes so many inaccurate assertions that it would take too much time to go into them--time that I feel is better spent on other matters).

Here appears to be his main points in the past week (and these are quotes from him):

1. If anyone believed all of those 18 points of Armstrongism between 100 A.D. and 1931, then Armstrongism would be false—for there would be no need to “restore” something that had never been lost or fallen into disrepair. Thus, when Thiel claims “that it was the leadership in Asia Minor that was faithful to the teachings of scripture and the apostles,” we know right away that he is contradicting the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong, who insisted that no one was faithful to all scriptural and apostolic teaching after 100 A.D.
2. I’d be interested if Thiel could find just one Sabbath-keeping sect in the WCG’s ancestry that believed in British Israelism, observance of the festivals of Lev. 23, the God Family doctrine, the not-born-again-until-the-resurrection doctrine, the going-to-doctors-is-idolatry doctrine, and the doctrine that Herbert Armstrong is the end-time Elijah. Of course he can’t, because Armstrongism wasn’t invented until the 20th century, just as I said.
3. And yet our earliest historical documents tell us there were bishops in Rome in the first century. Who should we believe? The primary sources, or Thiel and F. A. Sullivan?...You quote F. A. Sullivan, who dissents from Catholic teaching and therefore can’t really be called a “Catholic” scholar, and you quote from the old Catholic Encyclopedia, which provides historical testimony and arguments that contradict what you claim is true, and you quote from the popular Catholic historical writer Lopes, who really can’t be called a Catholic “scholar” in the stricter sense. So I’m not terribly impressed with your attempt to question the historicity of the Roman succession of bishops.

Sadly, Jared and others err as they do not understand certain scriptures, early church history, nor certain teachings of HWA.

First point. What HWA taught was that he restored truths that the Ephesus era had (this was until probably 135 A.D. according to pre-Tkach era WCG writings). He never taught that the Sym rna era did not have any of those teachings, only that the Sardis and some previous eras lost them. Here are some quotes:

Herbert W. Armstrong once wrote, "At least 18 basic and essential truths have been restored to the True Church since" the Philadelphia era began, in 1933 (Mystery of the Ages, Dodd & Mead, 1985, p. 251).

Greetings, everybody! This afternoon I want to speak on the mission of the Philadelphia Era of the Church, this Church today in comparison to the first era of the Church, the Ephesus Era of the Church. It's been seeming more and more to me, as the years go by, that the Bible was written primarily for the Philadelphia Era of the Church...Today's mission of the Church you will find in Matthew 24:14. And this gospel of the kingdom…that is the same gospel that Jesus preached…shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come...I came among the true Church of God of the Sardis Era. They didn't know what the gospel was, they thought it was what they called the third angel's message. They didn't know what the gospel really was. They called it a third angel's message...The Sardis Church even didn't have the right form of government...Now the next thing that's restored to the Church — what and why man is! WHAT IS MAN? WHY DID WE COME TO BE ON EARTH? The Sardis Church didn't know...Now the Sardis people knew that Christ would rule a thousand years. They knew it would be a Millennium. They had NO IDEA IN THE WORLD about what would happen in the Millennium. They HAD NO IDEA WHAT IS THE PURPOSE of the Millennium (Armstrong HW. Mission of the Philadelphia Church Era. Sermon 12/17/83).

This is all documented in the article Did You Know What the First Changes the Tkach Administration Made? Hence Jared's contentions that HWA taught that all 18 truths were lost by 100 A.D. is in error.

Second point. In this he has several subpoints, and I will try to briefly address them here:

a. The early church did believe in a version of what Jared calls British Israelism. Actually, my sermonette last Sabbath was on that. I plan to post something about this later and see no reason to rush it here because of Jared's writings. However, I will simply state that a more complete understanding of Matthew 10:23 clearly shows that the Protestant and apparently Roman Catholic position that all the descendants of Israel were in the area now considered Israel and Palestine (or Judea and Samaria in Christ's time) is in clear biblical error.
b. The early church did keep the Holy Days of Leviticus 23. This is documented in the articles What Does the Catholic Church Teach About Christmas and the Holy Days?, Did Early Christians Observe the Fall Holy Days?, and Melito's Homily on the Passover.
c. It appears to me that Theophilus of Antioch taught the God Family doctrine.
d. I am working on an article about the resurrection and will simply state here that I believe that Polycarp and Theophilus taught it. And that their positions are consistent with HWA's on this matter.
e. Jared has mischaracterized WCG's position on doctors, but I will simply state that the early church believed II Chronicles 16:12.
f. The early church clearly believed in a prophesied Elijah. In one of his other writings, Jared implies that LCG teaches that HWA was the prophesied Elijah as doctrine. This is not the case, and simply shows that he does not understand our beliefs. Those interested in the Elijah matter are directed to the article The Elijah Heresies.
g. We do not believe in Armstrongism. Armstrongism is a derisive term intended to convey that we (like the Protestants and Catholics) believe Human Tradition over the Bible--but we do not. But we do believe that we teach and believe what the apostolic church taught. However, the Roman Catholics (including Jared) admit that they DO NOT TEACH MANY OF THE BELIEFS HELD BY THE FIRST AND CENTURY CHURCH. We in the COGs are the ones that are faithful, and we can prove it from both the Bible and the writings of those who truly believed the Bible.

Third point. Unlike most of those at the xCG site, I have actually own nearly all the English versions of the the writings of the first and second centuries, and have actually read pretty much all the non-apocryphal ones. So have Catholic scholars. F.A. Sullivan happens to be a professor emeritus at the Vatican's Gregorian University in Rome--thus he is a modern Roman Catholic scholar. The Catholic Encyclopedia was also written by Roman Catholic scholars. The book from Lopes, I actually bought from the Vatican, while in the Vatican--hence they approved it.

The fact that there is nothing in the early writings that proves there were any bishops of Rome prior to the middle of the second century is known by all scholars--not just those of us in the COGs. The fact that xCG wishes to ignore that is sad, but the facts are the facts. Many quotes from the Roman Catholics are found in the article What Does Rome Actually Teach About Early Church History?

It would be nice if xCG would try to properly characterize what historians and we in the COGs actually teach on these subjects. Those truly interested in the early church may wish to read the article Location of the Early Church: Another Look at Ephesus, Smyrna, and Rome.

Click here for previous news

Click here to go back to the COGwriter home page

Volume 9, issue 32 COGwriter B. Thiel (c) 2006