By COGwriter
Jesus said:
25 If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more will they call those of his household! (Matthew 10:25, NKJV throughout unless otherwise noted)
Yes, Jesus said that His faithful followers would be called all kind of names. Satan wants you to not be part of the true Christian faith, by calling it and its followers names. I know of people who have fallen for that very Satanic tactic.
Ask yourself, what if the most faithful Christian church preceded Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism? Would it make sense that some would excessively criticize it?
Well, as it turns out, some have derogatorily accused the true Church of God of being a cult as well as called the true Church of God heretical as well as given it other disparaging names throughout history.
What is a cult? Does the Bible endorse or warn against a "cult" of Christians who also believe what is commonly considered to be the Jewish law? This article will try to answer those questions and deal with some common accusations.
The term cult has been defined as follows:
cult noun ( RELIGION ) Definition
• [C] a religious group, often living together, whose beliefs are considered extreme or strange by many people
Their son ran away from home and joined a religious cult.
• [C] a particular system of religious belief
(the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press. viewed 04/07/12)
The Continuing Church of God is not a group that people run away from their homes to join. It is also not some type of commune where its members live together. Of course, true followers of Jesus have always been considered to be extreme by many non-faithful.
As far as the second definition, a particular system of religious belief, that definition seems to apply to any religious system.
Notice the particular system of religious belief that Jesus taught:
4 "It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.'" (Matthew 4:4)
And that is what we in the Continuing Church of God teach. It is not some weird brain washing--it is to believe Jesus and obey God and His commands (cf. Revelation 14:12).
Notice the definition of heretic from two sources:
Heretic
means “one who chooses,” and heresy means simply “a choice.” A heretic is one who chooses his own creed ... (Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, E. Cobham Brewer, 1894)
Her´e`tic
n. 1. One who holds to a heresy; one who believes some doctrine contrary to the established faith or prevailing religion. (Webster's 1913 Dictionary)
So, a heretic is one who chooses to believe something different.
In the case of the true Christian faith, a heretic is one who does not hold "to the faith which has been once and for all entrusted to God's holy people" (Jude 3, NJB)--a heretic chooses to believe something other than the biblical faith.
Thus, any who changed the original faith are heretics, by definition, therefore excluding as heretics those who hold to the original biblical faith.
Here is a link to a related sermon: Cults and other Name Calling.
History shows that various ones did not look kindly to towards real Christians:
22 But we desire to hear from you what you think; for concerning this sect, we know that it is spoken against everywhere. (Acts 28:22)
Can you handle a faith that is spoken against everywhere?
Most cannot. Propagandists learned that if you tell a lie often enough, more and more people will believe it.
Hence, this is one reason that Satan has inspired a lot of name calling against the true Christian church throughout the ages.
In May 2015, Time ran the following:
They probably wouldn't like what it looks like
With political season kicking off again, so is the season where folks begin to use the term “Christian nation.” Some claim we were one, some claim we are one, and some say we need to become one. Yet, each time I hear that phrase I have an inner Princess Bride moment where I say to myself, “you keep using that word, but it doesn’t mean what you think it means.”
So, what if we became a Christian nation? Well, a few things would have to change… drastically. Here’s a few quick examples: Because truth be told, if America actually were to become a Christian nation, I don’t think the people who advocated for it would be too happy with the end product.
The reality is that relatively few in the USA would tolerate original, true Christianity.
Most who claim to be Christian in the USA condemn the original Christian faith as cultic and/or call us other names. This is despite the fact that Jude wrote "to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).
Amazingly, a leading Protestant scholar (H. Brown) has admitted:
It is impossible to document what we now call orthodoxy in the first two centuries of Christianity (Brown HOJ. Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), 1988, p. 5).
In other words, much of what now passes for "orthodox Christianity" did not exist in the first two centuries after Jesus was resurrected. This is basically because while there was only one original church, another major group emerged in the second century who changed certain original Christian practices and became what most now seem to feel represent "orthodoxy."
The true Church of God kept to the original teachings on topics such as the Godhead and God's plan of salvation, whereas what came later denounced those important beliefs as cultic.
While the Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants changed, we in the Continuing Church of God DO hold to the teachings of the first two centuries of Christianity.
And we can prove it.
Most do not understand original Christianity and do not want to. Yet, you can learn about it if you are interested in the truth:
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 in the first century to the 21st century. Two related sermon links would include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries. In Spanish: Marque aquí para ver el pdf folleto: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Let me also add that if that a lot of what people consider to be 'Christian' in this age is certainly not biblical nor Christ-like.
The late 20th century Cardinal Jean-Guenolé-Marie Daniélou wrote that church history is mistaught and misses many aspects of what he calls Jewish Christianity. He wrote that this has led to a “false picture of Christian history” (Daniélou J, Cardinal. The Theology of Jewish Christianity. Translated by John A. Baker. The Westminister Press, 1964, Philadelphia, p. 2).
And while there are issues with his research, he was correct that the vast majority have not been properly taught the truth of church history and overlooked Christianity that is more “Jewish” than that accepted by most of the mainstream churches. The Franciscan Jean Briand reported that, historically, “the official Church systematically ignored the Judeo-Christians” (Briand J. The Judeo-Christian Church of Nazareth. Translated from the French by Mildred Duell. 1st edition, Franciscan Printing Press, Jerusalem, 1982, p. 66).
So, yes, the truth about the early Christian church has been missed and mistaught. This has led to massive ignorance about true Christianity as well as name-calling throughout history.
Furthermore, were you aware that the original Christians, were considered to be part of a cult? Notice that Paul was charged with being the leader of a religious cult:
2 When Paul was called in, Tertullus presented the charges against Paul in the following address to the governor: "Your Excellency...5 We have found this man to be a troublemaker who is constantly stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the cult known as the Nazarenes ...
10...Paul said, "I know, sir, that you have been a judge of Jewish affairs for many years, so I gladly present my defense before you. 11 You can quickly discover that I arrived in Jerusalem no more than twelve days ago to worship at the Temple. 12 My accusers never found me arguing with anyone in the Temple, nor stirring up a riot in any synagogue or on the streets of the city. 13 These men cannot prove the things they accuse me of doing.
14 "But I admit that I follow the Way, which they call a cult. I worship the God of our ancestors, and I firmly believe the Jewish law and everything written in the prophets.
(Acts 24:2,5,10-14, New Living Translation ®, copyright © 1996, 2004 by Tyndale Charitable Trust.)
While other translations use the term "sect," instead of "cult," was still used as a negative label and form of name-calling.
Christians with "Nazarene" practices have long been accused of being part of a cult (or "Nazarne sect," Acts 24:14, NIV/NJB) by persecutors of various types. Jesus warned that the faithful would be persecuted and insulted:
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matthew 5:10-12, NIV)
God's true prophets have, according to Jesus, been subject to insults and false statements, and so also will true followers of Jesus. And that has happened.
Furthermore, even the Apostle Paul wrote that "all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecutions" (2 Timothy 3:21).
So, of course, keeping the same practices that Jesus of Nazareth, the Nazarene ringleader called the Apostle Paul, and others throughout history does not make one part of an inappropriate "cult" (see also Nazarene Christianity: Were the Original Christians Nazarenes?).
The relatively small size of the true and genuine Church of God is consistent with the type of church that Jesus said He would have:
32 "Do not fear, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. (Luke 12:32, NKJV)
32 Fear not, little flock, for it hath pleased your Father to give you a kingdom. (Luke 12:32, Douay-Rheims)
Note that both Protestant and Greco-Roman Catholic renderings of Jesus' words demonstrate that His followers should NOT be afraid of the fact that His real flock will be little. Jesus also taught only a few would find the way to eternal life in this age (Matthew 7:14; 20:16). The Apostle Jude indicates that the number of saints was relatively small (Jude 14), while the Apostle Paul called the small group a “remnant” (Romans 11:5).
If the Roman Catholic Church was actually very small (and the Protestants did not try to trace their history for centuries through it), it is likely that most modern Protestants would consider it a strange cult with its incense, how its clergy dress, its acceptance of pagan traditions, bowing before statues, its reliance on apparitions and claims of messages from angels, and its use of relics, to name just a few examples. But because of its size and Protestantism's limited history, the world instead accepts it as "orthodox," while condemning true followers of Jesus and the word of God as a cult.
The Apostle Paul wrote:
14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? 15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? 16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said:
"I will dwell in them
And walk among them.
I will be their God,
And they shall be My people."17 Therefore
"Come out from among them
And be separate, says the Lord.
Do not touch what is unclean,
And I will receive you."
18 'I will be a Father to you,
And you shall be My sons and daughters,
Says the Lord Almighty." (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)
Because the world's churches do NOT have the same respect for following the word of God as we do, plus do not contend for the original faith, we do not consider them to be brothers and sisters in Christ. We consider them to be neighbors that we love.
And we teach what Jesus said to do about them:
43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:43-48)
19 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' (Matthew 19:19)
Yes, we pray for those who pursue and persecute us. And yes, we honor our parents even if they are not COG.
So, yes, for those who are not COG, we love them and do not hate them. But we are not part of their religions.
This is not new to us in the 21st century.
There is an old Arabic Islamic manuscript that reports about those considered to be Judeao-Christians. It was published in English in 1966 by Shlomo Pines as The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity according to a New Source. It was originally written by an Arabic Muslim around the tenth century named Abd al-Jabbar and called Tathbit Dala'il Nubuwwat Sayyidina Mahammad. One chapter of it is believed to be an Islamic interpretation of a lot of "Judeo-Christian" writings (some probably from true Nazarenes, others from Essenes, etc.).
Shlomo Pines translated much of the one chapter of it into English, and here is the translation of one section of it:
(71a) 'After him', his disciples (axhab) were with the Jews and the Children of Israel in the latter's synagogues and observed the prayers and the feasts of (the Jews) in the same place as the latter. (However) there was a disagreement between them and the Jews with regard to Christ.
The Romans (al-Rum) reigned over them. The Christians (used to) complain to the Romans about the Jews, showed them their own weakness and appealed to their pity. And the Romans did pity them. This (used) to happen frequendy. And the Romans said to the Christians: "Between us and the Jews there is a pact which (obliges us) not to change their religious laws (adyan). But if you would abandon their laws and separate yourselves from them, praying as we do (while facing) the East, eating (the things) we eat, and regarding as permissible that which we consider as such, we should help you and make you powerful, and the Jews would find no way (to harm you). On the contrary, you would be more powerful than they."
The Christians answered:"We will do this."
(And the Romans) said: "Go, fetch your companions, and bring your Book (kitab)." (The Christians) went to their companions, informed them of (what had taken place) between them and the Romans and said to them: "Bring the Gospel (al-injil), and stand up so that we should go to them."
But these (companions) said to them: "You have done ill. We are not permitted (to let) the Romans pollute the Gospel. In giving a favourable answer to the Romans, you have accordingly departed from the religion. We are (therefore) no longer permitted to associate with you; on the contrary, we are obliged to declare that there is nothing in common between us and you;" and they prevented their (taking possession of) the Gospel or gaining access to it. In consequence a violent quarrel (broke out) between (the two groups). Those (mentioned in the first place) went back to the Romans and said to them: "Help us against these companions of ours before (helping us) against the Jews, and take away from them on our behalf our Book (kitab)." Thereupon (the companions of whom they had spoken) fled the country. And the Romans wrote concerning them to their governors in the districts of Mosul and in the Jazirat al-'Arab. Accordingly, a search was made for them; some (qawm) were caught and burned, others (qawm) were killed.
(As for) those who had given a favorable answer to the Romans they came together and took counsel as to how to replace the Gospel, seeing it was lost to them. (Thus) the opinion that a Gospel should be composed (yunshi`u) was established among them…a certain number of Gospels were written. (Pines S. The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity according to a New Source. Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Volume II, No.13; 1966. Jerusalem, pp. 14-15).
The above, which appears to be accurate, would seem to have taken place in the second century--probably around 134/135 A.D.. It is interesting for a number of reasons. It shows that there were two groups that professed Christ then. One called "Christians" above, and the other (the faithful ones) called "companions." The fact that the companions would no longer associate with the compromisers showed that in whatever area the above occurred in, there were definitely two groups. Notice also that the Roman-connected group wanted the faithful to be persecuted. And there has been direct and indirect persecution from governmental leaders and/or religious leaders since then.
Here is a version of what occurred according to the noted historian E. Gibbon:
The first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem were all circumcised Jews; and the congregation over which they presided united the law of Moses with the doctrine of Christ. It was natural that the primitive tradition of a church which was founded only forty days after the death of Christ, and was governed almost as many years under the immediate inspection of his apostle, should be received as the standard of orthodoxy. The distant churches very frequently appealed to the authority of their venerable Parent, and relieved her distresses by a liberal contribution of alms...
The Nazarenes retired from the ruins of Jerusalem to the little town of Pella beyond the Jordan, where that ancient church languished above sixty years in solitude and obscurity. They still enjoyed the comfort of making frequent and devout visits to the Holy City, and the hope of being one day restored to those seats which both nature and religion taught them to love as well as to revere. But at length, under the reign of Hadrian, the desperate fanaticism of the Jews filled up the measure of their calamities; and the Romans, exasperated by their repeated rebellions, exercised the rights of victory with unusual rigour. The emperor founded, under the name of Alia Capitolina, a new city on Mount Sion, to which he gave the privileges of a colony; and denouncing the severest penalties against any of the Jewish people who should dare to approach its precincts, he fixed a vigilant garrison of a Roman cohort to enforce the execution of his orders. The Nazarenes had only one way left to escape the common proscription, and the force of truth was on this occasion assisted by the influence of temporal advantages.
They elected Marcus for their bishop, a prelate of the race of the Gentiles, and most probably a native either of Italy or of some of the Latin provinces. At his persuasion the most considerable part of the congregation renounced the Mosaic law, in the practice of which they had persevered above a century. By this sacrifice of their habits and prejudices they purchased a free admission into the colony of Hadrian...
When the name and honours of the church of Jerusalem had been restored to Mount Sion, the crimes of heresy and schism were imputed to the obscure remnant of the Nazarenes which refused to accompany their Latin bishop. They still preserved their former habitation of Pella, spread themselves into the villages adjacent to Damascus, and formed an inconsiderable church in the city of Bercea, or, as it is now called, of Aleppo, in Syria. The name of Nazarenes was deemed too honourable for those Christian Jews, and they soon received, from the supposed poverty of their understanding, as well as of their condition, the contemptuous epithet of Ebionites ... The unfortunate Ebionites, rejected from one religion as apostates, and from the other as heretics, found themselves compelled to assume a more decided character; and although some traces of that obsolete sect may be discovered as late as the fourth century, they insensibly melted away either into the church or the synagogue...
It has been remarked with more ingenuity than truth that the virgin purity of the church was never violated by schism or heresy before the reign of Trajan or Hadrian, about one hundred years after the death of Christ (Gibbon E. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume I, Chapter XV, Section I. ca. 1776-1788).
Because of the Jewish Bar Kochba revolt, Emperor Hadrian outlawed many practices considered to be Jewish. The 20th century historian Salo W. Barron wrote:
Hadrian . . . According to rabbinic sources, he prohibited public gatherings for instruction in Jewish law, forbade the proper observance of the Sabbath and holidays and outlawed many important rituals (Barron SW. Social and Religious History of the Jews, Volume 2: Christian Era: the First Five Centuries. Columbia University Press, 1952, p. 107).
The Christians in Judea were forced to make a decision. They either could continue to keep the Sabbath and the rest of God's law and flee, or they could compromise and support a religious leader (Marcus) who would not keep the Sabbath, etc. but live in Jerusalem.
Sadly, many who claimed Christ made the wrong choice and followed the direction of Marcus--who then wanted the faithful persecuted.
Shortly after the incident in Jerusalem, Polycarp of Smyrna, a man ordained directly by the original Apostles, wrote that “many” (which likely included many in Rome and Alexandria as well as others with affiliation) were following vain/false forms of Christianity:
“For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist,” and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil; and whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there is neither a resurrection nor a judgment, he is the first-born of Satan. Wherefore, forsaking the vanity of many, and their false doctrines, let us return to the word which has been handed down to us from the beginning (Polycarp. Letter to the Philippians, Chapter VII).
The "vanity of many" was an emerging group calling itself Christian, that had compromised.
By the early third century, another COG leader, Serapion of Antioch, declared:
That ye may see also that the proceedings of this lying confederacy, to which is given the name of New Prophecy, is abominated among the whole brotherhood throughout the world. (Serapion. From the epistle to Caricus and Ponticus. As translated by Roberts & Donaldson)
That lying confederacy ended up being the Greco-Roman church, with its patriarchs in Jerusalem, Rome, and Alexandria. After Serapion died, Antioch and later Constantinople joined that confederacy. Those five Greco-Roman 'sees' exist to this day and are looking to more fully rejoin.
That said, we see that there are documented incidents in early Christianity where the faithful warned against the compromisers.
And let me add that the compromisers did not like that.
Name calling against faithful Christians did not stop in the Book of Acts, but it has continued throughout the church era.
After declaring that Passover should be kept on Sunday, instead of the biblical date of Passover at his Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., the Roman Emperor Constantine stated:
Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way. (Eusebius' Life of Constantine, Book III chapter 18)
I do not recall Jesus indicating that Jews were detestable (He was a Jew) or that He changed the date of Passover--our Saviour, Jesus, did not teach to go against the Bible, like Constantine. But apparently sun-worshipping Constantine, who without even being baptized, declared himself a lay bishop at the Council of Nicea he called in 325 A.D., felt he had the authority to do otherwise. And the Sunday observance is now known as Easter (it is because sun-worshiping practices, cowardice, and the avoidance of practice that were considered to "Jewish" that is really why Easter is observed when it is; see also Did Early Christians Celebrate Easter?). That said, notice Constantine labeled those who would hold to the original biblical date as "detestable Jewish crowd."
What kind of man was Constantine? Here is something from someone who liked him:
1. He was divorced and remarried. His first wife was Minervina, and he divorced her to marry his second wife was Fausta.
2. Constantine killed his second wife. In AD 326, he had his first son Crispus (from his first marriage) killed. He also had his second wife Fausta killed. Both names were removed from public documentation. After Constantine had his second wife killed, he never married again until his death at age 65. https://taylormarshall.com/2017/07/11-facts-constantine-first-christian-roman-emperor.html
Let me add that Emperor Constantine also declared the death penalty against Christians in Jerusalem who refused to eat pork (Pines S. The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity according to a New Source. Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Volume II, No.13; 1966. Jerusalem, pp. 31-32).
And while he declared he wanted to "have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd" he continued to put pagan gods on his coinage, even after he claimed to see a vision of Jesus which some claim resulted in his conversion.
Many who declare the truth Church of God as a heretical cult, have endorsed and adopt pagan worship practices (see also the free online books: Should You Keep God's Holy Days or Demonic Holidays?, Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?, and Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism).
Shortly before his death, in 332, Constantine issued his Edict against the Heretics (Chapter LXIV.—Constantine’s Edict against the Heretics. This document is from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library at Calvin College). He included those with COG views as heretics, despite the fact that they, not he, were faithful.
In an Imperial decree in 380, Emperor Theodosius declared that the “Catholic Church” was the official religion of the Roman Empire (Theodosian Code XVI.1.2. Cited in Bettenson H, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, London: Oxford University Press, 1943, p. 31).
Theodosius also issued an Imperial decree that said any who would not embrace his definition of the Godhead were prohibited to use the term “catholic,” and he also labelled such persons as “foolish madmen” and “heretics” (ibid).
Historical scholar Jonathan Roberts (who was not in the COG) wrote:
Until Theodosius commanded his subjects to believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, and enforced his commands upon them by the most inhumane ways, that doctrine was rejected and resisted by the Greek and Roman followers of the Christos ... That so senseless and unnatural doctrine should have been forced upon any people, by any means, however tyrannical is a mystery even more mysterious than the arithmetic that can make one three, and three one (Roberts JM. Antiquity Unveiled: Ancient Voices from the the Spirit Realms Disclose the Most Startling Revelations, Proving Christianity to be of Heathen Origin ... Published by Oriental publishing co., 1894. Original from the University of Michigan, Digitized May 21, 2007, p. 468).
Yes, it is true that prior to Theodosius, the bulk of those who professed Christianity were not trinitarian. Most who attended Emperor Constantine's Council of Nicea were also not trinitarian, yet many do not realize that. According to historical accounts, the attendees at this council were split into three factions:
1) Arians - Supporters of the position of Dr. Arius, about 10% of the attendees.
2) In-Between - Those who held a position between the Arians and Proto-Trinitarians, about 75% of the attendees. Eusebius was the main spokesperson for them.
3) The Proto-Trinitarians - Those who supported the views of Athanasius, about 15% of the attendees.
Trinitarians were NOT the majority at Nicea as the historians Henry Bettenson and Chris Mauder admit:
The decisions of Nicaea were really the work of a minority, and they were ... disliked by many who were not adherents of Arius. (Bettenson H, Mauder C. eds., Documents of the Christian Church. London: Oxford University Press, 1943, p. 45)
Notice what a Roman Catholic priest wrote about Athanasius:
Remember the example of St. Athanasius, the great champion for the true Faith in the 4th-Century crisis concerning the Person and nature of Jesus Christ. St. Athanasius stood up against 90% of all the bishops in the Church, and even endured the appearance of being excommunicated by Pope Liberius . . . (Gruner N., Priest. Part II FATIMA: Roadblocks and Breakthroughs. The Fatima Crusader 110, Fall 2014, p. 48)
So, the above account claims that 90% of Greco-Roman bishops did NOT support the trinity at the Council of Nicea. The idea that the trinity was a fundamental part of even the Greco-Roman faith simply does not agree with the facts. Although, Eusebius led the biggest group, he and his side did not truly win--partially because the sun-god honoring Emperor Constantine, who had accepted a Mithraism trinity, liked Athanasius' pitch.
So, there began to be imperial support for a trinity that most who professed Christianity did not accept. Plus, note that Pope Liberius denounced Athanasius, the trinitarian bishop.
The second Formula of Sirmium (357) … the Semi-Arian bishops, assembled at Ancyra, the episcopal city of their leader Basilius, issued a … formula, asserting that the Son is in all things like the Father, afterwards approved by the Third Synod of Sirmium (358). This formula, … was signed by a few orthodox bishops, and probably by Pope Liberius, (Benigni U. Council of Rimini. The Catholic Encyclopedia)
In the Council of Rimini, 359 A.D ... nearly all bishops present, 400 in number {decided} … to sign a semi-Arian creed. (Kramer, p. 165)
Furthermore in:
367. COUNCIL OF TYANĄ accepted the letter of Liberius pronouncing the Semiarian Bishops to be orthodox. (Johnson CFH, ed. The book of Saint Basil the Great, Bishop of Cappadocia, on the Holy Spirit. Claredon Press, 1892, p. lviii)
A few years later, from 370-380, Demophilus was the Patriarch of Constantinople (List of Patriarchs of Constantinople. Patriarchate of Constantinople, http://patriarchateofconstantinople.com/list-of-patriarchs.html accessed 07/21/21).
Later, Theodosius became Emperor and accepted the trinitarian view instead (a semi-Arian creed, would be a binitarian one--early Christians were clearly binitarian--see Binitarian View: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning).
One of the major reasons the faithful are considered to be part of a heretical cult is because we DO NOT ACCEPT THE GRECO-ROMAN TRINITY! Yet, it was the adoption of the trinity that was heretical.
That said, what kind of man was Theodosius?
Well, in order to get his trinity doctrine more widely accepted, he removed the Patriarch of Constantinople as he would not accept it.
Yes, Theodosius removed Demophilus from being the Patriarch of Constantinople? Why? Because he would NOT accept the Emperor’s trinitarian Nicene Creed--which many who profess Christ now accept--even though it was NOT the original creed and contains changes from the original Christian faith (see also What Was the Original Apostles' Creed? What is the Nicene Creed?).
The 5th century Greco-Roman historian Socrates Scholasticus wrote of Theodosius:
When the emperor found the Church in this state, he began to consider by what means he could make peace, effect a union, and enlarge the Churches. Immediately therefore he intimated his desire to Demophilus, who presided over the Arian party, and inquired whether he was willing to assent to the Nicene creed, and thus reunite the people, and establish concord. Upon Demophilus's declining to accede to this proposal, the emperor said to him, “Since you reject peace and unanimity, I order you to quit the churches.”
Which when Demophilus heard, weighing with himself the difficulty of contending against superior power, he convoked his followers in the church, and, standing in the midst of them, thus spoke: “Brethren, it is written in the Gospel.' If they persecute you in one city, flee ye into another. ' ' Since therefore the emperor excludes us from the churches, take notice that we will henceforth hold our assemblies without the city. (Socrates Scholasticus, pp. 265-266)
Therefore, consider that: 1) trinitarianism was not the position of the patriarchy of Constantinople in the late fourth century, 2) Arian meant Semi-Arian above (and this happens in other writings), 3) an emperor removed the patriarch Demophilus for not endorsing the Nicene Creed, 4) that political considerations, not theological reasons, looks to have been the reason to push trinitarianism and 5) Theodosius resorted to name-calling against those who held to the original biblical position. Specifically for those he disagreed with his trinitarian position, he stated:
"for the others, since in our judgment they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics" (Theodosian Code XVI.1.2. Cited in Bettenson H, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, London: Oxford University Press, 1943, p. 31).
Furthermore, let’s see something written about his actions in 390 A.D. by a contemporary witness and Greco-Roman theologian named Theodoret who reported this about Emperor Theodosius:
The emperor was fired with anger when he heard the news, and unable to endure the rush of his passion, did not even check its onset by the curb of reason, but allowed his rage to be the minister of his vengeance. When the imperial passion had received its authority, as though itself an independent prince, it broke the bonds and yoke of reason, unsheathed swords of injustice right and left without distinction, and slew innocent and guilty together. No trial preceded the sentence. No condemnation was passed on the perpetrators of the crimes. Multitudes were mowed down like ears of grain in harvest-tide. It is said that seven thousand perished. (Theodoret. Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret. Dalcassian Publishing Company, 2019, p. 200).
Theodosius also had people killed (called Quartodecimans) who retained the biblical date of Passover (Gibbon E. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume III, Chapter XXVII. ca. 1776-1788).
“To the reign of Theodosius belonged the glory or the infamy of establishing Inquisitors of Faith, who seem to have been specially enjoined to look after the crime of the Quartodecimans” (Smith W. A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology: Oarses-Zygia. J. Murray, 1890 Item notes: v.3, p. 1064).
The change to trinitarianism was finalized by the Council of Constantinople, which was a council of men convened by Theodosius, in 381 A.D. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
245 The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was announced by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381) (Catechism of the Catholic Church. Imprimatur Potest +Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, NY 1995, p. 72).
Remember that the apostles had all been dead for hundreds of years before the trinitarian position with the Holy Spirit was agreed upon.
Here is something from a Roman Catholic scholar:
… nowhere does the Bible normally and explicitly state the doctrine of the Trinity, ... the doctrine is clearly a development … (Sungenis RA. NOT BY SCRIPTURE ALONE A Catholic Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura, 2nd ed. NIHIL OBSTAT Monsignor Carroll E. Satterfield Censor Librorum, IMPRIMATUR Monsignor W. Francis Malooly Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, 1997. Catholic Apologetics International Publishing, 2013, pp. 76-77)
A "development" of the "doctrine" means that the trinity was NOT part of the original faith that Christians are to contend for. To consider those who do not accept the"development" of the trinity teaching as a part of a heretical cult is historically and biblically wrong.
The late Cardinal Gibbons, who accepted the changes, also wrote something that shows such changes should not have been accepted:
No new dogma unknown to the Apostles not contained in the primitive Christian revelation can be admitted. (John xiv 26; xi 15; xvi 13.) For the Apostles received the whole deposit of God’s word, according to the promise of the Lord: (Gibbons J, Cardinal. The faith of our fathers: being a plain exposition and vindication of the church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, 83rd reprint edition. P. J. Kenedy, 1917, p. 9)
The reality is that trinitarianism, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, Sunday as the Christian day of worship, Christmas, Lent, Ash Wednesday (adopted around the 8th century per The Catholic Encyclopedia), eating unclean meats, Passover/Easter on Sunday, and many other Greco-Roman practices were unknown to the original Apostles and are also not in the Bible. They were dogmas unknown to the Apostles.
Yet, even most Protestants have accepted the trinitarian and other changes, including that many follow Theodosius’ general example of considering non-trinitarians as part of a heretical cult.
Shortly after Theodosius' decree, Greco-Roman Catholic scholars such as Jerome and Epiphanius referred to later Christians who held aspects of original catholic doctrines as Nazarenes.
Notice also the following statement about the faithful Nazarene:
From Justin to Jerome, however, the Nazarenes were viewed as doctrinally within the fold of what could be called “catholic Christianity.” (Varner W. Baur to Bauer and Beyond: Early Jewish Christianity and Modern Scholarship. Academ.edu, Received November 16, 2019)
And it should be noted that the Nazarene “catholics” were not part of the church that Justin Martyr and Jerome were affiliated with. But the Nazarenes held doctrines consistent with the Church of God in Smyrna.
In his Letter 112 to Augustine, Jerome called those with the original Christian practices, "a most pestilential heresy." So, more name calling.
Yet, notice an interesting, but highly important, observation by the late Roman Catholic priest Bellarmino Bagatti:
In conclusion, regarding the Nazarenes, both St. Epiphanius and St. Jerome have nothing to condemn them for except the observance of customs forbidden by the Councils. (Bagatti, Bellarmino. Translated by Eugene Hoade. The Church from the Circumcision. Nihil obstat: Marcus Adinolfi. Imprimi potest: Herminius Roncari. Imprimatur: +Albertus Gori, die 26 Junii 1970. Franciscan Printing Press, Jerusalem, p. 35)
And that is a major difference between the Continuing Church of God and most others who consider themselves Christian. The Greco-Roman-Protestants accept several Imperial (and other) Councils as divinely authoritative (they are selective about the various councils as some contradict others) as their basis to change from aspects of the original beliefs (or at least accepted those changed beliefs), while we in the CCOG consider those councils of mainly historical interest, often used to name call and/or persecute those who hold to the original faith.
And the name calling has continued from the trinitarians against those of us who still hold to original Christian beliefs.
Yet, this was not to be unexpected for the true followers of Jesus:
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you (Matthew 5:10-12)
32 But recall the former days in which, after you were illuminated, you endured a great struggle with sufferings: 33 partly while you were made a spectacle both by reproaches and tribulations, and partly while you became companions of those who were so treated; (Hebrews 10:32-34)
4 ... they think it strange that you do not run with them in the same flood of dissipation, speaking evil of you. (1 Peter 4:4)
The fact that people name call against true Christians has occurred throughout the church age.
Now, Jesus warned that Satan would take steps to try to turn people away from the truth:
18 "Therefore hear the parable of the sower: 19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside. 20 But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. (Matthew 13:18-21)
Wouldn't trying to turn people aside by claiming that the truth is a cult be consistent with Jesus's warnings?
And notice, for those that do not IMMEDIATELY DROP THE TRUTH, PERSECUTION--which can come from "friends," "relatives," and religious "leaders"--is also prophesied. Do not let those who call those who accept the truth a "cult" dissuade you. Satan wants you to be so dissuaded.
Note that God had this warning from Jesus also recorded by Mark and Luke:
14 The sower sows the word. 15 And these are the ones by the wayside where the word is sown. When they hear, Satan comes immediately and takes away the word that was sown in their hearts. 16 These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; 17 and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word's sake, immediately they stumble. (Mark 4:14-17)
11 "Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. 12 Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. 13 But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away. (Luke 8:11-14)
Having this in the New Testament three times is there for emphasis. God does not want you to listen to those who name-call against the true Church of God to turn you away. But this has been an effective technique of Satan throughout history, so he repeats it today!
Furthermore, Satan has his ministers appearing to be good:
2 14 ... For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 11:14-15)
It is from various ones who CLAIM to be on God's side, but have been on the side of Satan, that called the truth church a heretical cult and provided other improper "warnings" against it.
For another example of name-calling, notice what happened during the Middle Ages:
The Paulicians did not call themselves Paulicians or Tonrakians, but the Universal and Apostolic Church. To them the orthodox churches, … had apostatized from the faith, lost their orders, and forfeited their sacraments. As to their Mariolatry and adoration of saints and pictures and crosses, it was all nothing but idolatry. (Arpee L. Armenian Paulicianism and the Key of Truth. The American Journal of Theology, Vol. 10, No. 2, Apr., 1906: 267-285)
They called themselves the Apostolic Catholic church, but … nicknamed Paulicians by their enemies … (Paulicians. The Encyclopaedia Britannica: Mun to Pay. 1911, p. 961; Blackwell D. A HANDBOOK OF CHURCH HISTORY: A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Ambassador College Graduate School of Theology. April 1973, p.29)
The Paulicians claimed to be THE ‘holy universal and apostolic church’ founded by Jesus Christ and his apostles. Of the false churches, they would say: “We do not belong to these, for they have long ago broken connection with the church.” … 6th century. (Lesson 50 – What Became of the Church Jesus Built? 58 Lesson: Ambassador College Bible Correspondence Course, 1968, p. 13).
Those called Paulicians considered that they were part of the original catholic church and that those who called themselves Greco-Roman Catholics were idolaters who long before had broken connection to the faithful church. More on them can be found in the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?
Understand that Greco-Roman Catholics seem to consider that the doctrine of the trinity, as adopted at an Imperial Council in 381, is the expression of the unity of God:
Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed. Indeed the unity of God is so fundamental (Joyce G.H. The Blessed Trinity. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company).
The Unity and Trinity of God ... The numerical unity or identity of the divine nature in the Three Persons is indicated in the trinitarian formulas (Ott L. Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Nihil Obstat: Jeremiah j. O’Sullivan. Imprimatur: +Cornelius Ep. Corgagiensis ei Ap. Amd. Rossensis, 7 October 1954. Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1974, pp. 58-59).
However the Greco-Roman Catholics seems to feel that the Antichrist and those associated with him will be opposed to the adopted concept of the trinity. Notice the following Roman Catholic writing:
Jeanne le Royer (Sister of the Nativity--died 1798). "When the reign of Antichrist draws near, a false religion will appear which will deny the unity of God and will oppose the Church. Errors will cause ravages as never before ..." (Dupont, p.58).
As far as ravages go, other Greco-Roman Catholic prophecies (see Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies: Do They Mirror, Highlight, or Contradict Biblical Prophecies?) warn that their end time faith will be hit by heretics (like those who believe the Bible), that this will cause problems, but between signs and wonders and government power, the Greco-Roman Catholics will (for a time) win. Many Greco-Roman Catholics teach that the Trinity is essentially the expression of the “unity of God.”
The fact that we do not teach Theodosius' trinity, we have been, and will be, called a heretical cult. This is despite the fact, that by definition, those who hold to the original faith are not heretics.
Furthermore, notice the following Roman Catholic prophecy that was written between 1810 and 1830:
Nursing Nun of Bellay … Once again, the madmen seem to gain the upper hand! … their books and their doctrines are swamping the world. But the day of justice will come. … the Great Monarch ascends the throne of his ancestors. … All these things shall come to pass once the wicked have succeeded in circulating large numbers of bad books. (Dupont Y. Catholic Prophecy: The Coming Chastisement. TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1973, p. 51)
Recall, that “madmen” was a term used by Emperor Theodosius for those who refused to accept his trinitarian position. Hence, the above seems to be saying that when books come out that his doctrinal supporters do not like, this will cause the Church of Rome problems, but lead to the rise of the Great Monarch. As far as the “throne of his ancestors” goes, may be a reference to the Hapsburgs (Culleton, The Prophets and Our Times, p. 195) and a resurrected final “Holy Roman Empire” (cf. Revelation 13:1-4) that other Greco-Roman Catholic private prophecies have pointed to. So, again it looks like calling the faithful "madmen" is still part of Satan's plan.
Let it also be understood that although Pope Francis claims he wants unity of all Christendom, that unity does NOT extend to non-trinitarians. It should also be pointed out that in the 21st century, the World Council of Churches still does not allow non-trinitarian churches to be members and that the Vatican's 2020 document, The Bishop and Christian Unity: An Ecumenical Vademecum, is also aimed at trinitarian churches. Because we do not want them unless they convert, and they do not want us unless we compromise on doctrine, the bulk of those who claim Christianity will consider us in the CCOG to be a cult. Bartholomew, Patriarch of Constantinople, has labeled those opposed to his unity plans as “unacceptably fanatical” (see Bartholomew I Patriarch of Constantinople Opposes Those Who Warn Against Catholic Unity). Pope Francis has called those who oppose his unity plans as having the devil as their father (see Pope Francis misunderstands the devil’s unity). He also said that those who claim to hold to fundamental Christian beliefs are a "scourge" (see Pope Francis speaks of ancient Ephesus and also condemned ‘fundamentalists’).
Notice the following table which is similar to that which is in our free online book Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?:
Continuity, Yet No Permanent City, Table
Scriptural Period
Calendar DateMain Leadership Location
Other LocationsCalled Itself
Derisively Called by OthersEphesus/Apostolic
c. 31 - 67 (Apostolic)Jerusalem
Antioch, Asia Minor, Greece, Judea, Rome, British IslesChurch of God
Christians (Acts 11:26), Nazarene sect/cult (Acts 24:5)Ephesus/Apostolic
c. 67 - 100 (Apostolic)
c. 100 - 135 (Post Apostolic)Jerusalem/Asia Minor
Antioch, Greece, Rome, British Isles, Asia, JudeaChurch of God, Catholic Church
Nazarene sect/cult, Minim 1Smyrna
c. 135 – 250Asia Minor
Antioch, Greece, Rome, British Isles, Asia, Africa, Judea/PalestineChurch of God, Catholic Church
Nazarenes, Minim (and non-derisively as Smyrnaeans)Smyrna
c. 250 – 380Asia Minor
Antioch, Greece, Rome, British Isles, Asia, Africa, Judea/PalestineChurch of God, Catholic Church
Nazarenes, Minim, HereticsSmyrna, Church in the Wilderness (Revelation 12:6)
c. 380 – 450Armenia
Balkans, Asia Minor, Greece, Syria, British Isles, Asia, Africa, Judea/PalestineChurch of God, Catholic Church, Nazarene
Paulians, Nazarenes, Judaizers, Ebionites, “Foolish madmen” 2Pergamos, Church in the Wilderness
c. 450 – 1050Armenia/Balkans/Bulgaria
Asia Minor, Europe, Arab lands, Syria, British Isles, Asia, Africa, Judea/PalestineChurch of God, Catholic Church, Christian
Paulicians, Bogomils, Cathars, Patarenes, Albigensians, Vaudois, Catharists, Puritans, Bougres*, Publicans, Lombardists, Waldenses 3Thyatira, Church in the Wilderness
c. 1050-1600France
Asia Minor, Europe, Arab lands, Syria, British Isles, Asia, Africa, Judea/PalestineChurch of God, Church of Christ
Cathars, Patarenes, Lollards, Sabatati, Manicheans, Publicani, Brabanters, Aragonese, Arnoldists, Navarrese, Leonesti, Basques, Petrobrusians, Coterelli, Anabaptists, Waldensians 3Sardis
c. 1600 – c. 1700Great Britain
Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, South AmericaChurch of God, Church of Christ
Judaizers, Anabaptists, Traskites, Sabbath keepersSardis
c. 1700 – 1933United States
Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, South America, Australia, Pacific IslandsChurch of God, Church of God Seventh Day
Saturday peoplePhiladelphia
c. 1933 – 1986Western USA
Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, South America, Australia, Pacific IslandsRadio/Worldwide Church of God, Christian
Armstrongism cultPhiladelphia continuation
c. 1986 – presentMainly Western USA
Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, South America, Australia, Pacific IslandsWorldwide Church of God (1986-1992), Global Church of God (1992-1998), Living Church of God (1998-2011), Original Catholic Church (2008-2011, confirmed by Dibar Apartian in 2008), Continuing Church of God & Original Apostolic Catholic Church of God (2012 to present), Christian
Armstrongism cult, Protestants 4Laodicean
1986 – presentMainly USA
Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, South America, Australia, Pacific Islands(Various) Church of God, Christian
Armstrongism cult1 Minim was a derisive term from Jews towards heretical Jews, such as those who professed Christ.
2 This appears to be the start of the time that Greco-Roman professors of Christ began to regularly refer to those with the original catholic faith as heretics and to place various labels on them. Then they also often grouped them together with the unfaithful who were not also supportive of the predominant Greco-Roman religious authorities. The vast majority of most people identified by the names often given by the Greco-Romans were NOT part of the true Church of God—but some relatively few in many of the groups listed in this and later sections were. How do you tell? By looking at the records that are available on doctrine and practice. Basically, those who are considered to have practices and teachings consistent with the Church of God in Judea (1 Thessalonians 2:14), the Apostle John (1 John 2:18-21, 5:19) and the original faith (Jude 3). Obvious doctrines include keeping the Sabbath, avoiding unclean meats, not being trinitarian, professing Jesus, keeping the Ten Commandments, observing Passover, baptism by immersion only of adults, denying immortality of the soul, looking forward to the millennial kingdom of God, etc. We do NOT include those who were militartistic, adopted Sunday, or otherwise did not hold Church of God doctrines.
3 The Waldenses/Waldensians claimed to have a list of bishops with succession from the apostles until the Reformation. But that list appears to be lost, yet was reportedly at least partially seen and accepted by Episcopal representatives in the 18th century. Also, no militaristic nor “Protestant” Lombardists were COG. Contacts made by this author in the 21st century revealed none had the old succession list, so a copy of one he put together with some of their records was provided to representatives in Italy and the USA in the year 2021 and graciously received.
4 Some Greco-Romans have improperly labelled the Continuing Church of God as Protestant as they are either not knowledgeable of, or improperly dismissive of, our continuing history. The Church of God (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:2) preceded the Protestant movement by about 1500 years as the table above shows. Part of the reason is that they do not want to admit such a group could have apostolic succession--even though we do (see also our free online book: eliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?). Our doctrines also differ from theirs and the Protestants as can be found in the free online book titled:Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism.
So, yes, you can expect more name-calling against the CCOG. It is no surprise if some derisively refer to us as a cult as those of the true Christian church have long been called many names.
The Bible warns:
16 You shall not go about as a talebearer ... (Leviticus 19:16)
Some who derisively refers to the true Church of God as a cult are talebearers. While some accept that label, consider the following:
8 The words of a talebearer are like tasty trifles,
And they go down into the inmost body.9 He who is slothful in his work
Is a brother to him who is a great destroyer.10 The name of the Lord is a strong tower;
The righteous run to it and are safe. (Proverbs 18:8-10)
If someone speaks derisively against the Continuing Church of God, you might ask why.
We rely on the word of God and are safe in God to do so.
Often talebearers have no proof, just assertions. That brings the following to mind:
16 The lazy man is wiser in his own eyes
Than seven men who can answer sensibly. (Proverbs 26:16)
This article has hopefully given you sensible reasons and scriptures to consider above those of lazy accusers of the brethren.
That said, what if some criticism is correct or has truth (cf. 1 Samuel 8:1-20)?
Well, such talebearers are often, to cite the words of Jesus, "Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel! (Matthew 23:24) and who "do not see the plank that is in your own eye? Hypocrite!" (Luke 6:42).
And if they are in a COG, they most often fail to accept Philadelphian church governance (for details, check out: The Bible, Peter, Paul, John, Polycarp, Herbert W. Armstrong, Roderick C. Meredith, and Bob Thiel on Church Government).
The difference between the true church and others is who really relies on the Bible as the source of doctrine.
Apostle Paul wrote:
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
The word of God is the source of doctrine to be complete.
The Apostle Paul also wrote:
21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thessalonians 5:21, KJV)
21 Test all things; hold fast what is good. (1 Thessalonians 5:21, NKJV)
Yet, most do not do that.
One of the reasons that the true Church of God is considered to be a cult by the Greco-Roman Catholics, Protestants, and certain secular scholars is that the Church of God has not accepted traditions of men to change our basic beliefs.
Jesus warned against religious leaders that did that:
6 Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. 7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
8 "These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'" (Matthew 15:6-9)
The Orthodox Catholic Church claims that it is the church of the seven councils. What does that mean?
Well, it means that they accept doctrinal changes from men that were agreed to at those councils--the first two of which were called by Roman Emperors. That is the lens in which they view doctrine. So, if scripture is in conflict with one of those councils, they defer to the council for doctrine. There are other traditions of men that the Eastern Orthodox also accept, but the main official one are those church councils.
The Roman Catholic Church claims to accept both scripture and something it calls the 'living magisterium.' Yet, 1) the Church of Rome also accepts the decisions of those and some other councils, even where they are in conflict with scripture and 2) based on certain papal pronouncements, the Vatican has accepted as church dogma various non-biblical doctrines, including some related to Jesus' mother Mary.
Neither the Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic Church hold to the teachings of the original catholic church on many matters. This is documented in detail in the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?
The Protestant movement claims sola Scriptura (the belief that doctrine should come from the Bible alone), but despite that being its early ralling cry, Martin Luther did not believe in it and declared numerous books of the Bible as questionable (see Sola Scriptura or Prima Luther? What Did Martin Luther Really Believe About the Bible?). Furthermore, although Martin Luther once stated that he looked upon the Bible "as if God Himself spoke therein" he also stated:
My word is the word of Christ; my mouth is the mouth of Christ" (O'Hare PF. The Facts About Luther, 1916--1987 reprint ed., pp. 203-204).
[Specifically, what Martin Luther wrote in German was ""Ich bin sehr gewiss, dass mein Wort nitt mein, sondern Christus Wort sei, so muss mein Mund auch des sein, des Wort er redet" (Luther, 682) - also translated as "I am confident that it is not my word, but Christ's word, so my mouth is His who utters the words"(God's words - the violence of representation. Universitatea din Bucuresti, 2002. http://www.unibuc.ro/eBooks/filologie/meanings/1.htm, September 25, 2003).]
The Bible, in Romans 3:28, states:
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.
Martin Luther, in his German translation of the Bible, specifically added the word "allein" (English 'alone') to Romans 3:28-a word that is not in the original Greek. Martin Luther reportedly said:
You tell me what a great fuss the Papists are making because the word alone in not in the text of Paul ... say right out to him: 'Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,' ... I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very well that the word 'alone' is not in the Latin or the Greek text (Stoddard J. Rebuilding a Lost Faith. 1922, pp. 101-102; see also Luther M. Amic. Discussion, 1, 127).
So, the major Protestant Reformer, Martin Luther, accepted opinions and preferences of men over the word of God.
Martin Luther also made other INTENTIONAL mistranslations to the Bible. Other translators have sometimes followed suit--instead of translating the New Testament Greek as it should be, they mistranslated passages related to keeping the seventh day Sabbath (see The Sabbath in the Early Church and Abroad) and the biblical holy days (see Should You Keep God's Holy Days or Demonic Holidays?).
Speaking of not relying on the Bible for the Sabbath, the Church of Rome teaches that Sunday came from its decisions apart from the Bible and that if Protestants believed in sola Scriptura, they would all keep the seventh day Sabbath (see a series of late 19th century Roman Catholic articles on The Christian Sabbath).
Furthermore, the Protestant churches have tended to accept many decisions of the same councils of men that the Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic churches do. Yet we, in the Continuing Church of God, are not Eastern Orthodox Catholic, Roman Catholic, nor Protestant nor do we hold the decisions of those councils as authoritative. We also do not accept any decisions they came to as valid that are in conflict with the Bible. More on why we are NOT Protestant (and why the Protestants are in error) can be found in the free online book: Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism.
When I have tried to point out the acceptance of traditions of men and abandonment of sola Scriptura by Protestants, they tend to argue back that 1) the mistranslations are accurate--when they can be proven to be false and 2) they believe the Bible, but they simply have a different interpretation. Well, they often have a "different interpretation" all right, but that interpretation is based on the acceptance of vain human traditions and philosophy--not the original faith.
Notice that in the New Testament, the Apostle Paul warned:
8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. (Colossians 2:8)
Paul is warning Christians to NOT let traditions or philosophies of men deceive us.
Yet, that is what has basically happened to the Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants as well as most who fell away from the Church of God in the late 20th century (see The Falling Away: The Bible and WCG Teachings).
The Apostle Peter added:
18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. (1 Peter 1:18-19)
Do not cling to family religious traditions above the word of God. We are to be unblemished and not believe or love lies.
Yet, because we in the CCOG do not, we are considered to be a heretical or extremist cult by many who profess Christ.
Just calling Jesus "Lord" is insufficient to be a true Christian. Jesus said:
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' 23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!' (Matthew 7:21-23)
Yes, those that consider the Continuing Church of God to be a cult are, if they claim to worship Jesus at all, are worshiping Him in vain.
Jesus further warned that Philadelphian Christians would be opposed by evil forces:
7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write,
'These things says He who is holy, He who is true, "He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens": 8 "I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. 9 Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie — indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. (Revelation 3:7-9)
Yes, people who oppose us are part of the synagogue of Satan according to Jesus.
So, are you a supporter of the CCOG or the synagogue of Satan?
We in the Continuing Church of God do not engage in odd activities like polygamy, shaving heads, ritual animal sacrifices, or building armed compounds, etc. that are associated with 'cults' in the minds of many secularists and others.
So, why do some critics claim that the Church of God is a cult?
The anti-Church of God websites and other sources that suggest that the COG is a fraud, scam, and/or terrible doomsday cult are wrong. We teach the GOOD NEWS that Jesus and the Kingdom of God are the true hope for this world and that Jesus will prevail and usher in a uptopian time (see also The Gospel of the Kingdom of God).
Some COG critics make direct outrageously false statements, while others are more subtle and pretend to be trying help. Yet, the Bible teaches that it is "the Devil" (Satan) who is "the accuser of our brethren" (Revelation 12:9,10). The Bible also warns that although Satan's "ministers" try to appear to be righteous, they will come to their end (2 Corinthians 11:14-15)--none should follow false accusers.
Perhaps the most famous critic against the Church of God was the late Dr. Walter Martin, who prefers to use negative labels such as "Armstrongism" (see also What is Armstrongism?). He prefered that possibly because he knew that the expression Church of God is used extensively throughout the New Testament for the true Church (about 12 times in singular and plural forms), and he preferred to call the true Church of God derisive names. Here is something from one of his books:
The Armstrong cults believe that Armstrong was God’s sole channel of divine truth. (Martin W. The Kingdom of the Cults. Baker Books, 2003, p. 502)
But that is not true.
That was never the position of any truly in the Philadelphia remnant.
Plus, Herbert Armstrong made errors and I and certain other COG leaders have repeatedly acknowledged that he did. Sadly, however, COG critics tend to like to listen to other COG critics and often accept improper assertions about the COG as facts. Notice something else that Herbert Armstrong taught:
“Don't believe me – BELIEVE YOUR BIBLE – BELIEVE GOD!” (Armstrong HW. Personal. Plain Truth magazine, September 1963, p. 1)
All non-biblical doctrinal literature, including what someone like Herbert Armstrong wrote, should be proven by the Bible to be believed (cf. Acts 17:11). Dr. Walter Martin is basically bearing false witness, but many have relied on him instead of checking for the truth.
Of course, the Bible shows that "many false witnesses came forward" against Jesus (Matthew 26:60) and there were many "witnesses" with false charges against the Apostle Paul (Acts 24:1-14). Just being falsely accused by a lot of people, then, obviously does not disqualify one from being faithful. The Apostles, like Peter and others, also warned that some who at one time claimed to have association with the true church could turn bitter (Acts 8:18-23; Hebrews 12:14-15)--sadly many of more vocal accusers seem to be in that category. Notice also what Jesus Himself taught:
20 If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you (John 15:20).
The Apostle Paul taught:
12 Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. (2 Timothy 3:12)
16 At my first defense no one stood with me, but all forsook me. May it not be charged against them. (2 Timothy 4:16)
If you really believe that you should follow Jesus, please do not be turned aside by those who speak against those who teach His message--Jesus and the Apostle Paul both suggested that those were signs of being part of the true Church of God.
In my view, the main reason that some have made claims about the genuine Church of God supposedly being a cult is that they "are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God" (Matthew 22:29).
One Protestant-type website, GotQuestions.com refused to correct errors when I provided documented proof (see What is Armstrongism?). And then there are anti-COG sites who like to claim they post the truth, like Banned by HWA, but mainly function as accusers of the brethren.
Jesus Himself taught about love (Matthew 5:53-45; 12:29-31), the need for repentance (Matthew 3:2; Luke 13:3), His sacrifice (Matthew 26:26-32), the law (Matthew 5:17-18; see also What Did Jesus Teach About the Ten Commandments?), the Holy Days (Luke 22:14-21; John 7:37), monogamy (Matthew 19:4-6), avoiding unclean meats (Luke 11:11-12; Matthew 7:9-11; see also The New Testament Church and Unclean Meats), the "beginning of sorrows" (Matthew 24:4-8), the coming Great Tribulation (Matthew 24:21), protection for the Philadelphian Christians (Revelation 3:7,10; see also There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians), and His return (Matthew 24:30-31). We in the Continuing Church of God do as well.
Basically in the Continuing Church of God, "we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God" (1 Corinthians 1:23-24). Many were offended by Jesus' actual teachings when He was on the earth (John 6:66), and many still are today.
Here is a listing of some of the beliefs of the Church of God:
There are more beliefs and they can be found at www.cogwriter.com and www.ccog.org. See also the Statement of Beliefs of the Continuing Church of God.
While many who profess Christ do not follow the practices of the original Christians, those in the Continuing Church of God strive to. The true Christian Church of God has long been spoken against since New Testament times (Acts 28:22).
Roman Emperors such as Constantine and Theodosius labeled us with derisive terms like heretics. Those whose beliefs connect to their councils of men (325 and 381 A.D. respectively) to this day consider the faithful to be heretically cultic. Calling the CCOG a cult is consistent with that--and Satan hopes that will dissuade you.
Genuine Christianity is about love. Love to God (Matthew 22:37-38) and love to neighbor (Matthew 22:39). And that “the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (James 2:8) and that we help show love towards God and neighbor by obeying Jesus and trying to fulfill Matthew 24:14; 28:19-20. God's entire plan is based on love (e.g. John 3:16; see also The MYSTERY of GOD’s PLAN: Why Did God Create Anything? Why Did God Make You?). Despite human flaws (and no one in the Church of God is perfect nor was anyone in the early apostolic church), the faithful in the COG strive to teach and practice what the Bible teaches.
Of course, it was Jesus who foretold that the true church would be a “little flock” (Luke 12:32), hated by the world (Matthew 10:22), persecuted (Matthew 10:23), and called names (Matthew 10:25). He also foretold only a few would find the way to life in this age (Matthew 7:14; cf. Matthew 12:31-32) and that most would let outside influences stop them from following the true way now (cf. Matthew 13:18-23).
Remember, that Jesus specifically stated:
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you (Matthew 5:10-12)
Yes, the true church would be spoken against. Jesus warned this would happen to His true followers.
Jesus also said of some of His critics:
25 But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, 'They hated Me without a cause.' (John 15:25)
Of course, the critics claim to have a cause, but do not realize that it is Satan's cause they are promoting. Satan does not want people to be in the Kingdom of God nor does he want the Gospel of the Kingdom of God preached to the world as a witness as that will lead to the end (cf. Matthew 24:14). (An article related to some anti-COG websites is available: Banned by HWA and Ambassador Watch).
We of the Continuing Church of God urge repentance in this age, explain the love of God, and warn the world of the results of its sins and God’s ultimate judgment. We believe that those called, chosen, AND converted in this age are being saved to serve in support of getting the message of God out as a witness in this age and in the age to come. We believe that those called of God in this age to be faithful Philadelphia Christians will be moved to support that. The Bible shows that truly God is a God of love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:16) and has an exciting plan of salvation. And that we individually are called to give in a unique way (for more details, please read the free online book: The MYSTERY of GOD’s PLAN: Why Did God Create Anything? Why Did God Make You?).
We also expect persecution (cf. Daniel 7:25a; 11:30-35). Sadly, since most end-time Christians are NOT Philadelphian Christians according to prophecies from Jesus, they will distance themselves from the CCOG when that happens. They will wrongly think being wise, yet DO NOT BE LIKE THEM AND DISTANCE YOURSELF FROM the CCOG--those actual Christians who do will suffer even more persecution shortly thereafter (cf. Daniel 7:25; Revelation 13:5-7). See also Persecutions by Church and State and There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians. Why it May Be Near Petra.
Please study your Bible and check out what we teach. For truly God is a God of love and has an exciting plan of salvation (two free online books of possibly related interest may be Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? and Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism).
The Bible teaches that "the Devil" (Satan) is "the accuser of our brethren" (Revelation 12:9,10). Jesus said the Devil was "a liar and the the father of it" (John 8:44). Do not be dissuaded by those who do not really believe the Bible and make misleading comments about the COG: "lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices" (2 Corinthians 2:11) as the Apostle Paul wrote. The Apostle Paul also warned that Satan's ministers can seem to be "ministers of righteousness" (2 Corinthians 11:14-15) so all should be careful about Church of God accusations. If you hear one, first find out if it is REALLY true (most I have read are not upon detailed investigation), and then if it is, if that should according to scripture disqualify the entire church--and even then consider what happened related to the faithful in scripture.
The Apostle Paul himself was often accused of being the ringleader of a cult that professed Christ that also believed in biblical practices that some Jews also believe. We in the Continuing Church of God strive to hold to the same version of Christianity that Jesus taught and that the original apostles and their followers strove to follow: see also The History of Early Christianity page.
If you are not sure what to do, please be like the Bereans of old and "search the scriptures" and valid historical sources to demonstrate what if what is stated here is true (cf. Acts 17:10-11).
Do not allow Satan's minions who call us in the true church names dissuade you from following the truth.
Here is a link to a related sermon: Cults and other Name Calling.
Note: We truly of the Continuing Church of God only accept as inspired the 39 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New Testament and no other document (see also Who Gave the World the Bible? The Canon: Why do we have the books we now do in the Bible? Is the Bible complete?). Therefore, although other current and historical documents/articles/books/booklet/posts by various Church of God leaders throughout history often have value, as they generally also tend to contain personal opinion, we do not consider that any of them are on the same level as sacred scripture, and hence believe that they can contain error.
Thiel B. Is the True Church of God a Heretical Cult? www.cogwriter.com/cult.htm COGwriter 2012 2024 0807